CAUSE NO. 99-03487

ELIZA MAY § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

vs. §

TEXAS FUNERAL SERVICE §

COMMISSION, ROBERT L. WALTRIP § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS

SERVICE CORPORATION §

INTERNATIONAL, and SCI §

MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, and §

GOVERNOR GEORGE W. BUSH, in §

his official capacity as Governor of §

Texas, and Individually § 261ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE

BY DEFENDANT GOVERNOR GEORGE W. BUSH

TO: Defendant, GOVERNOR GEORGE W. BUSH, by and through his attorneys of record, Robert O’Keefe and Joseph Crawford, TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL, Assistant Attorneys General, General Litigation Division, P.O. Box 12548, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711-2548

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.3, Plaintiff, Eliza May (“May”) serves this Response to Defendant, Governor George W. Bush’s (“Governor Bush”), Request for Disclosure, and for such disclosure would respectfully respond as follows:

(a) the correct names of the parties to the lawsuit.

Response: The correct names of the parties are as shown in the style of the case above.

(b) the name, address, and telephone number of any potential parties.

Response: May has not determined that there are other persons who should be joined as parties at present. However, persons who are nonparties, but who appear to have been involved as co-conspirators with the parties named in the Plaintiff's First Amended Original Petition, and who therefore could be joined as parties, include Governor Bush’s former Chief of Staff, Joe Allbaugh, his General Counsel Margaret Wilson, Senator John Whitmire, Johnnie B. Rogers, Leo T. Metcalf, III , Robert G. Duncan, and Texas Attorney General John Cornyn. Addresses for those persons are as follows:

Joe Allbaugh Johnnie B. Rogers

Office of the Governor 11003 Onion Creek Court

1100 San Jacinto Austin, Texas 78747

Austin, Texas 78701 512/282-5518

512/463-2000

Senator John Whitmire Leo T. Metcalf, III

Capitol Extension SCI Management Corporation

Room 3E.6 1712 North Frazier, #117

Austin, Texas 78701 Conroe, Texas 77301

512/463-0115 409/756-3311

Robert G. Duncan Margaret Wilson

Colonial Services, Inc. Office of the Governor

1801 East Red River 1100 San Jacinto

Victoria, Texas 77901 Austin, Texas 78701

512/463-2000 512/576-0043

John Cornyn

Texas Attorney General

209 West 14^th Street

Price Daniel, Sr. Building, 8^th Floor

Austin, Texas 78701

512/463-2191

May will supplement this response as more information becomes available in discovery.

(c) the legal theories and, in general, the factual bases of the responding party's claims or defenses (the responding party need not marshal all evidence that may be offered at trial).

Response: May repeatedly reported, and objected to the fact that in apparent violation of Texas law, SCI apparently had two employees serving as Commissioners on the TFSC at the same time: Leo T. Metcalf (“Metcalf”), and Robert G. Duncan (“Duncan”). Section 2(A)(6) of Article 4582b provides: “No person shall be appointed to the commission who is an officer or employee of a corporation or other business entity controlling or operating, directly or indirectly, more than three funeral establishments, if another commissioner is also an officer or employee of the same corporation or business entity.” May reported, and objected to, this improper conflict of interest and undue and improper influence by and on behalf of SCI. May (and other TFSC employees) repeatedly reported the improper involvement and intervention of these two Commissioners in matters affected SCI.

May reported that in January 1998, TFSC staff found evidence indicating that two entities owned by or affiliated with SCI were performing embalming services without having proper licenses. Further, at about the same time, in the course of a routine audit of “provisional licensee” case files, TFSC staff learned that two persons who were purportedly provisional

licensees were performing embalming work for, or in connection with an SCI affiliate that did not have proper licensure.

Under Texas law a provisional licensee is a person “engaged in learning the practice of funeral directing and/or embalming under the instruction, direction and personal supervision of a duly licensed funeral director and/or embalmer of and in the State of Texas in accordance with the [Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 4582b], and having been duly issued a provisional license by [TFSC] . . . .” Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 4582b, § 1(E). The TFSC investigation indicated, among other things, that, apparently in an attempt to increase profit and/or decrease liability, SCI’s Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home in Dallas, Texas (“Sparkman-Crane”), was allowing William G. Honeycutt (“Honeycutt”) to conduct embalming services in the Sparkman-Crane on-site embalming facility without proper licensing. Honeycutt, in turn, was supposedly involved in supervising the provision licensees. The provisional licensees in issue had reported that they were performing their work at “Dallas Embalming Service,” but no such entity had an embalming license.

Texas law defines “embalmer” as a person who “for compensation disinfects or preserves a dead human body, entire [sic] or in part by the use of chemical substances, fluids, or gases in the body, or by the introduction of the same into the body by vascular or hypodermic injection, or by direct application into the organs or cavities, or by any other method intended to disinfect or preserve a dead human body, or restore body tissues and structures.” Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 4582b, § 1(D). The same provision makes it illegal in Texas for anyone who is not a licensed embalmer or a provisional licensee working under the supervision of a licensed embalmer to engage in embalming services. “[T]o ensure the maximum inhibition of pathogenic organisms in the dead human body,” TFSC regulations prescribe certain “minimum standards of performance” required of licensed embalmers in Texas. See TFSC Regulations, § 203.16(a). Those standards, for example, specify certain procedures to avoid pathogenic contamination, including sterilization methods, destruction of contaminated clothing, use of antiseptic fluids, body cavity treatment, and the use of certain arterial fluids. Section 203.16(a)(1) provides generally that embalming “shall be performed only by embalmers licensed by the commission, in properly equipped and licensed establishments . . . .”

The TFSC staff determined that the two “provisional licensees” in question were ineligible in January 1998 to participate in scheduled “exit interviews,” which are another licensing requirement. Despite that TFSC staff determination, at the instigation of Metcalf (an SCI employee) the TFSC Commissioners conducted an illegal, unposted, closed meeting on January 28, 1998, in violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act, to deliberate on the eligibility of the two individuals in question. May objected to and reported on the illegality of that meeting concerning SCI personnel.

On or about March 6, 1998, TFSC denied applications for licenses sought by Honeycutt. Honeycutt’s two applications were for licensure of commercial embalming establishments, ostensibly to act as “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” but to do so in the establishment preparation rooms of Sparkman-Crane in Dallas and of Lucas Funeral Home (“Lucas”) in Hurst, Texas. The TFSC’s authorizing statute, Article 4582b, as interpreted by TFSC’s in-house legal counsel and other TFSC staff, did not authorize licensure of this type of commercial embalming establishment within an established, licensed funeral home, and May reported on that matter.

On March 25, 1998, TFSC Commissioner Metcalf, the employee of SCI who works or worked at SCI’s corporate headquarters in Houston, Texas, called TFSC staff to complain about the denial of the license to Honeycutt. Metcalf did so despite the fact that he had an obvious conflict of interest that should have led him to recuse himself from any investigation involving SCI or any other matter involving SCI. TFSC staff reminded Metcalf of the conflict of interest, but rather than recuse himself, Metcalf then called May to complain about and question the Honeycutt licensure denial. On the following day, Metcalf continued to contact May to continue to advocate the licensure of Honeycutt. On the same day, Johnnie B. Rogers, legal counsel for SCI, called May and again questioned TFSC’s action in denying the Honeycutt license applications. May reported repeatedly on Commissioner Metcalf’s improper actions on behalf of SCI.

Because of what appeared to be illegal embalming practices connected with various SCI funeral homes around the state, on March 31, 1998 TFSC issued subpoenas to 28 funeral homes in Texas that appeared to be involved in the improper arrangement, or that had received bodies embalmed by SCI-affiliated embalmers that were not properly licensed. On or about April 3, 1998, immediately after service of the subpoenas (by mail), Metcalf contacted TFSC staff to complain about and challenge the issuance of the subpoenas. TFSC’s in-house legal counsel reminded Metcalf of the obvious conflict of interest in his interjecting himself in an investigation involving his employer, SCI. Commissioner Metcalf, however, persisted in his demands and complaints about the investigation of SCI. Even after the admonition from TFSC’s in-house counsel, Metcalf immediately called May on the same day about the same matters, continuing to participate in the matter in violation of the conflict of interest prohibitions.

Again on the same day, Duncan called May to report that SCI Chairman and CEO Robert Waltrip had called him, and was “very upset” over the subpoenas and “was going to the Governor if he had to.” Duncan informed May that “for her own good,” TFSC should not use any subpoena process, but instead should send investigators to each of the 28 individual facilities to inspect the records on-site. Duncan knew that with only four inspectors on staff – and a total TFSC staff of only ten employees – the suggestion of such a time-consuming, staff-intensive procedure, simply to obtain records, was highly impractical. To maintain the pressure on May and the TFSC, on the same day, James Shelger, SCI’s General Counsel, and other SCI lawyers representing SCI, also called TFSC staff to question and complain about the issuance of the subpoenas.

Then, on April 7, 1998, the TFSC received a letter from Johnnie B. Rogers, one of SCI’s lawyers, stating that SCI affiliated funeral homes refused to comply with the subpoenas, and contended that the TFSC lacked authority to issue the subpoenas. TFSC’s authorizing statute specifically provides that “[t]he commission may issue . . . subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum.” Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art 4582b, § 2(L).) Rogers echoed Duncan’s demand that the TFSC should be required to send investigators to each of the 28 locations to inspect the records of the funeral homes on-site. Rogers, of course, also knew that with only 4 investigators, such on-site inspections of 28 facilities were not feasible for the TFSC without substantial delay. The SCI entities refused to comply fully with the subpoenas, as reported repeatedly by May.

On April 8, 1998, May received a threat from Josh Kimball, one of the two SCI-affiliated provisional licenses whose supervision the TFSC staff originally questioned. Kimball called and complained about the investigation and demanded information about the subpoenas that TFSC has issued. He then said: “I am going to kill all of you.” May reported the threat from the SCI provisional licensee to TFSC Chairman, Charles McNeil, and to the Austin Police Department. Such conduct violates Texas law, including Texas Penal Code, § 36.03(a) – “A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he: (1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant’s known legal duty . . . ;” Texas Penal Code, § 36.06(a) – “A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly harms or threatens to harm another by an unlawful act: (1) in retaliation for or on account of the service or status of another as a: (A) public servant . . . ; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime; or (2) to prevent or delay the service of another as a: (A) public servant . . . ; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime.”

Although SCI and its affiliated funeral homes responded to the TFSC subpoenas with refusal, hostility, obstructionism, and threats, each of the non-SCI entities that received subpoenas voluntarily complied with the subpoenas and followed the law.

On April 10, 1998, in response to the improper demands and law violations of SCI, Metcalf, Duncan and Rogers (after May complained of the improper influence on and intervention in the TFSC investigation), TFSC sent out two teams of inspectors to try to inspect the funeral home records on-site at two funeral homes, Sparkman-Crane and Lucas. When the inspectors arrived, they presented the funeral homes with a letter requesting the same documents as were listed in the subpoena. Initially the funeral homes refused to permit the investigators to inspect the records. That also violated Texas law including, Article 4582b, § 2(L) – “The commission may issue, or delegate to the executive director the power to issue, subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum.”; § 4D(1)(b) – “Failure by any person associated with the funeral establishment . . . to comply with this Act or a rule adopted under this Act.”; and 22 Tex. Admin. code § 201.7.(b) – “The executive director shall have the power to issue subpoenas and subpoena duces tecum to compel . . . the production of books, records, and documents.” May reported these violation as well. Eventually the inspector team at the Sparkman-Crane funeral home obtained production of the items that were on-site that were responsive to the subpoena; however, it turned out that most of the documents responsive to the subpoena categories were not on site, but rather were in SCI’s Houston headquarters. Lucas was even more obstructionist and hostile, and further violated the law, in refusing to produce any documents until police arrived at the scene.

By April 11, 1998, Metcalf, Rogers and Duncan had called TFSC Chairman McNeil to complain about the TFSC subpoenas, the on-site inspections, and the ongoing investigation. On April 13, 1998, Robert Waltrip called TFSC Chairman McNeil complaining abut the investigation, the subpoenas, and the on-site visits. Waltrip threatened to sue TFSC and improperly and illegally threatened to have the TFSC abolished by the Texas Legislature. These actions violated laws, including Texas Penal Code, § 36.04(a) – “A person commits an offense if he privately addresses a representation, entreaty, argument, or other communication to any public servant who exercises or will exercise official discretion in an adjudicatory proceeding with an intent to influence the outcome of the proceeding on the basis of considerations other than those authorized by law;” Texas Penal Code, § 36.03(a) – “A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he: (1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant’s known legal duty . . . ;” Texas Penal Code, § 36.06(a) – “A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly harms or threatens to harm another by an unlawful act: (1) in retaliation for or on account of the service or status of another as a: (A) public servant . . . ; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime; or (2) to prevent or delay the service of another as a: (A) public servant . . . ; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime.”

On April 14, 1998 Waltrip called May to again complain to her about TFSC’s issuance of subpoenas and the on-site visits. In that conversation Waltrip threatened to “do what [he] had to do.” Immediately following the conversation with May, Waltrip again called Chairman McNeil, and stated that he was going to file a complaint against TFSC the next day “and take it all the way to the Governor’s office.”

The next day, on April 15, 1998, apparently in an attempt to distract attention away from SCI’s own apparent violations of the law, Waltrip, accompanied by his counsel, Rogers, appeared at May’s office with his written “complaint” about the TFSC investigation. The last page of the “complaint” indicated that Waltrip had sent, or intended to send a copy of the complaint to Governor Bush. (On April 28, 1998, Waltrip provided supplemental materials with respect to his “complaint” and again indicated that he provided a copy to Governor Bush.) In fact, apparently Waltrip and Rogers hand-delivered a copy of the “complaint” to Governor Bush and/or members of his staff, and Waltrip and/or Rogers spoke to Governor Bush.

There then began a campaign of improper political pressure and intimidation and interference by the Governor of Texas and his staff, acting for the benefit of SCI and Waltrip, for the purpose of subverting Texas law and impeding, undermining, and halting the TFSC investigation of SCI affiliates. May repeatedly reported and complained of the illegal and improper pressure and conspiracy, and the efforts of the Governor and his staff to promote, assist, and aid SCI in attempting to impede and subvert the TFSC investigation of SCI. The Governor of Texas and his staff lack statutory and constitutional authority to intervene in an ongoing TFSC investigation, yet that is what they did.

Approximately forty-five minutes after Waltrip and Rogers left May’s office, she received a phone call from the office of Governor Bush, specifically from Joe Allbaugh, who was then Chief of Staff to Governor Bush. While May was unable to accept Allbaugh’s call when it came into the TFSC office, she returned Allbaugh’s call, but was told he was not available. Chairman McNeil also received a phone call from someone else in Governor Bush’s office: Polly Sowell, from the Governor’s appointments office. Sowell asked McNeil about the investigation, including the purpose and nature of the investigation. At McNeil’s direction, May called Sowell and explained the general nature of the investigation. At the same time, May reported to Sowell the conflict of interest violations of the SCI employees who were commissioners on TFSC.

At about the same time, McNeil informed May that SCI had sent Waltrip’s “complaint” to all of the TFSC commissioners to increase pressure with respect to the investigation at issue. McNeil also told May that Governor Bush’s office had instructed him to agree to SCI’s proposal for the TFSC to conduct an investigation of the TFSC staff involved in the on-site inspections of the SCI-affiliated funeral homes. Again, such an “instruction” was an illegal demand and illegal intervention of the Governor into the ongoing TFSC investigation of SCI. It also reflects an illegal conspiracy among the Governor, his staff, SCI, Waltrip, and SCI’s representatives, and an improper and illegal effort by the Governor and his staff to promote or assist the commission of an offense, in attempting to impede and halt the TFSC investigation, and to cover up the offenses by SCI and Waltrip.

In the days following April 10, Metcalf and Duncan contacted all or most of the TFSC Commissioners to follow up on and reiterate Metcalf’s earlier complaints about the TFSC staff’s alleged conduct during the subject investigation. Moreover, apparently following up on Waltrip’s demand that instead of investigating SCI, TFSC should investigate its own staff, Duncan and Metcalf apparently contacted the other TFSC Commissioners in violation of the Open Meetings Act, and of course in violation of the conflict of interest law, in attempts to convince the commissioners that the investigation should focus on TFSC staff instead of the alleged violations of law by SCI and it funeral home affiliates.

During this same time period, and presumably at the urging of Waltrip and/or SCI, various members of the Texas Legislature began calling or writing letters to the TFSC Commissioners and/or to May echoing Waltrip’s and SCI’s heavy-handed efforts to shift the focus of the investigation from SCI’s violations of the law to the TFSC staff. All of the legislators who inquired about the investigation were recipients of SCI campaign contributions. A series of nearly identical letters, apparently authored initially by SCI or its representative(s), deluged the Commissioners, to apply yet more crass political pressure and intimidation.

Thus, while the SCI-PAC was doling out political contributions, the political pressure to investigate TFSC staff, rather than SCI’s funeral homes, became intense. This was part of the illegal conspiracy involving, among others, SCI, Waltrip, and the Governor and his staff, to try to impede or halt the TFSC investigation of SCI.

On May 7, 1998, May made a report at a regularly scheduled TFSC Commission meeting concerning the status of the investigation, various apparent violations of the law by SCI and by certain Commissioners, the pressure by SCI, and the “complaint” lodged by Waltrip and SCI against TFSC. In the course of her report, May reported the apparent violations of the conflict of interest and other laws by Metcalf and Duncan, including Metcalf’s obvious conflict in his position as Chair of TFSC Complaint Review Committee, Metcalf’s and Duncan’s multiple calls and other intervention attempting to influence the TFSC investigations and inspections of SCI affiliated funeral homes, and Metcalf’s calls and contacts to exert pressure with respect to the SCI investigation. In that same report, May also referred to the illegal threats and attempted intimidation and coercion by Waltrip and SCI to prevent the TFSC staff from performing their duties under the law. May further reported the January 1998 violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act by the Commissioners themselves, when they conducted the unposted, closed meeting concerning the SCI provisional licensees. May also reported the underlying illegality involved in the SCI affiliated funeral homes that operated without proper licenses and thus performed illegal embalming and the accompanying improper supervision of the provisional licensees in question – practices that Metcalf and Duncan had attempted to defend and shield. May also reported that Waltrip had improperly called upon the Commissioners to terminate the employment of the entire TFSC staff, and Waltrip’s general efforts to obstruct the investigation of SCI affiliated funeral homes and to threaten the TFSC employees. At the same May 1998 meeting at which May provided this report, McNeil stated the he had spoken with “members” of Governor Bush’s office, and that as a result of that conversation, his directive now was to grant Waltrip and/or SCI’s request for an investigation of TFSC staff. Thus, McNeil, in effect, admitted that the Governor and his staff had intervened and were taking over direction of the TFSC with respect to certain issues arising from the TFSC investigation of SCI.

Metcalf asserted that as chairman of the Commission’s Complaint Review Committee, he recused himself when an accusation arose involving an SCI affiliated funeral home. Metcalf then confessed that he had “phoned the Commission, as chair of the Complaint Review Committee, to ask why the agency was going about this [SCI investigation] in such a manner in which the Commission had never done before.” Metcalf further stated that he “has every right to find out why the agency is conducting an investigation like never conducted before.”

On May 11, 1998 – four days after that Commission meeting – Senator John Whitmire of Houston called May, using a threatening and intimidating tone. Whitmire demanded that May report to his office at 8:00 a.m. the next morning day to justify the TFSC’s position with respect to the investigation of SCI affiliated funeral homes, and to explain the report she had given at the May 7, 1998 TFSC meeting. Whitmire also indicated that SCI intended to sue the TFSC. Whitmire was the recipient of a substantial amount of campaign contributions from SCI. What Whitmire did not state at the time was that he worked for, or was of counsel to, the law firm that represented SCI. Whitmire then undertook his own heavy-handed, intimidating efforts to back off May and TFSC from the SCI investigation. Whitmire, then, also joined the conspiracy to impede and interfere with the TFSC investigation and May’s performance of her official duties.

On May 12, 1998, as demanded, May reported to Senator Whitmire’s office, accompanied by the TFSC legal counsel. In his office, Senator Whitmire and two aides confronted May and proceeded to interrogate her in a hostile, abusive fashion concerning her investigation of SCI affiliated funeral homes. One of the senator’s aides asked “Don’t you realize who Waltrip is?” They also attacked McNeil as a “competitor” of SCI, and questioned whether that was the motive for the SCI investigation. Whitmire and his aides also indicated concern that the investigation could hurt SCI’s stock prices. Collectively, Whitmire and his staff attacked May and the TFSC for the investigation of SCI affiliated funeral homes, for the issuance of the subpoenas, and for the on-site inspection. Whitmire, et al.’s approach was prosecutorial, brow-beating, harassing, and pressuring. May reported the apparent conflict of interest violations of the law by Duncan and Metcalf, but Whitmire dismissed those matters completely, indicating that he was uninterested in any such violations and did not want to hear about them. Whitmire also stated that he intended to demand that May attend another meeting the following week, this time with Waltrip present, to try to “put an end to the matter.” Whitmire indeed scheduled another meeting for 8:00 a.m. May 18, 1998, apparently for the purpose of further influencing and impeding the ongoing TFSC investigation.

May reported these events and violations to the Texas Attorney General’s office and explained the ongoing interference and pressure exerted upon her and the TFSC with regard to this investigation. McNeil and the TFSC’s in-house legal counsel accompanied May to the second meeting in Whitmire’s office. When they arrived at about 7:45 a.m., Whitmire was not present, but his staff directed May and McNeil immediately to proceed to the office of Governor Bush. May, McNeil, and TFSC’s counsel proceeded into the Governor’s office. Shortly after 8:00 a.m., Whitmire emerged from the office of Bush’s Chief of Staff, Allbaugh, where the two had obviously been meeting. Whitmire then escorted May, McNeil, and TFSC’s counsel into Allbaugh’s office. Whitmire refused to allow a court reported hired by the TFSC to record the meeting to enter the office where the discussions would be held. Already present in the office were: Governor Bush’s General Counsel, Margaret Wilson; SCI’s counsel, Johnnie B. Rogers, SCI’s lobbyist, Johnnie B. Rogers, Jr.; and Waltrip. While Allbaugh began the meeting, the floor was given to Whitmire, who, assisted by Johnnie B. Rogers, essentially gave a repeat performance of the earlier inquisitorial attack against TFSC and May. The Waltrip group also attacked McNeil as a “competitor” of SCI, and questioned whether that was the motive for the SCI investigation. The meeting ended with Allbaugh, in a hostile, peremptory tone, demanding that TFSC staff deliver to him by 1:00 p.m. that afternoon a letter stating exactly what documents TFSC staff required to close the SCI investigation. Thus, once again, the Governor, through his staff, and those members of his staff, directly intervened in the TFSC investigation of SCI, gave improper and illegal directions to TFSC and May, and generally acted to further the purposes of the conspiracy.

Following this remarkable meeting, May again reported and complained about the continuing interference, pressure, harassment, and violations, with respect to the ongoing TFSC investigation. Despite the obvious wrongful exertion of influence, May and the TFSC did indeed deliver a letter to Allbaugh with respect to the investigation on or before the deadline established by Allbaugh.

Shortly after that meeting, Governor Bush’s General Counsel Margaret Wilson called May. Wilson told May that she was “under a lot of pressure” to bring this matter to a conclusion or else Governor Bush would “take the investigation away from” the TFSC. Thus, once again, the Governor and his staff, improperly intervened in the investigation and threatened to do what the Governor had no legal right or statutory or constitutional basis to do, and did so for the personal and financial benefit of his and his family’s longtime friend, Waltrip, and Waltrip’s company, SCI.

Later, on approximately June 3, 1998, the TFSC finally received some additional information responsive to the subpoenas that TFSC had issued two moths earlier. Instead of SCI delivering the information, however, Whitmire’s staff delivered the information. Moreover, the additional information still proved to be an inadequate and incomplete response to the subpoenas.

On August 3, 1998, the Complaint Review Committee (CRC) of the TFSC held a meeting, in part to consider the TFSC staff’s report on the status of the investigation of the SCI licensing issues. Metcalf did not attend. Based upon the findings of the CRC, on August 7, 1998, the TFSC issued letters indicating the violations found, and the penalties assessed against

more than twenty SCI-affiliated funeral homes. May and TFSC staff reported on a multitude of apparent violations by SCI and its affiliates. Those violations included the following:

1. “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, operated as a commercial embalmer since September 30, 1997, without a commercial embalmers establishment license in violation of Section 4(C), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(C)(1)(a), Article 4582b.

2. “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4682b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

3. “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” through its employees and/or agents, operated as a commercial embalmer from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, without a commercial embalmers establishment license in violation of Section 4(C), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(a), Article 4582b.

4. “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” through its employees and/or agents, permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

5. “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” through its employees and /or agents, operated as a commercial embalmer from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, without a commercial embalmers establishment license in violation of Section 4(C), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(a), Article 4582b.

6. “Dallas Embalming Service,” through its employees and/or agents, operated as a commercial embalmer from approximately January 29, 1997, through December 31, 1997, (and into January l998) without a commercial embalmers establishment license in violation of Section 4(C), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(a), Article 4582b.

7. “Dallas Embalming Service,” through its employees and/or agents, permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

8. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer since September 30, 1997, without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

9. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

10. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately April 10, 1998 through at least August, 1998, without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

11. Alternatively, “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, operated under the name “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

12. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged. for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(Q(l), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

13. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

14. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

15. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately January 29, 1997, through December 31, 1997, (and through January 1998) without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

16. Alternatively, “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, operated under the name “Dallas Embalming Service” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

17. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

18. Alternatively, “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” though its FDIC and employees and/or agents, permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

19. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas/Forth Worth Mortuary Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

20. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

21. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

22. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately April 10, 1998, through at least August, 1998, without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b) , Article 4582b.

23. Alternatively, “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, operated under the name “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

24. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(0(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

25. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

26. “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

27. Licensee Robert Gazaille, as FDIC of “Professional Morticians Service of Fort Worth/Dallas,” permitted the business to operate as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license from September 30, 1997, in violation of Section 4(C), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

28. Licensee Doyle Ooten, as FDIC of “Professional Morticians Service of Fort Worth,” permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

29. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00662), used the services of “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating since September 30, 1997, as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

30. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00400), used the services of “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating since September 30, 1997, as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

31. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 01015), used the services of “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating since September 30, 1997, as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

32. Licensee William G. Honeycutt owned and operated “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service” as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, in violation of Section 4(C), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Sections 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

33. Licensee William G. Honeycutt owned and operated “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Sections 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

34. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00662), permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

35. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00400), permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(0(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

36. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 01015), permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(Q(l), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

37. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00662), permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11 A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

38. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00400), permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

39. Licensee William G. Honeycutt, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 01015), permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

40. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), used the services of “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

41. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400); used the services of “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

42. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), used the services of “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

43. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), used the services of “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately April 10, 1998, until at least August 1998 without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

44. Alternatively, Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00662), operated under the name “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

45. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), used the services of “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately April 10, 1998, until at least August 1998 without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

46. Alternatively, Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 00400), operated under the name “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

47. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), used the services of “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately April 10, 1998, until at least August, 1998 without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

48. Alternatively, Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH 01015), operated under the name “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3.(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

49. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), permitted employees and/or agents to engage in a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

50. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), permitted employees and/or agents to engage in a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

51. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), permitted employees and/or agents to engage in a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(0(1), and Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

52. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11 A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

53. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

54. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(I 1 A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

55. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00662), engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Sections 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

56. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

57. Licensee Cindy Lewis, as FDIC of “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

58. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately January 29, 1997, through December 31,1997, (or through January 1998) without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

59. Alternatively, Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” operated under the name “Dallas Embalming Service” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

60. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

61. Alternatively, Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

62. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” used the services of “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately January 1, 1998, through April 10, 1998, without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

63. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” used the services of “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

64. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” used the services of “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

65. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” used the services of “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer from approximately April 10, 1998, until at least August 1998 without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

66. Alternatively, Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” operated under the name “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division” in violation of Commission Rule 203.29 and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

67. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to engage in a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(0(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

68. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A. Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

69. Licensee Steve Bates, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Crane Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

70. While a provisional licensee, Timothy W. Bass embalmed alone without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 3(D)(5), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

71. While a provisional licensee, Shera Nelson embalmed alone without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), ,Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 3(D)(5), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

72. While a provisional licensee, Dwayne Baumann embalmed alone without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 3(D)(5), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

73. While a provisional licensee, Joshua Kimball embalmed alone without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 3(D)(5), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

74. While a provisional licensee, Clemmie Manning embalmed alone without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 3(D)(5), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b.

75. “Memorial Funeral Home and Cremation Service,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

76. “Memorial Funeral Home and Cremation Service,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

77. “Memorial Funeral Home and Cremation Service,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(0(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

78. “Memorial Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

79. Licensee J. Harper, as FDIC of “Memorial Funeral Home and Cremation Service,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

80. Licensee J. Harper, as FDIC of “Memorial Funeral Home and Cremation Service,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Mortuary of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

81. Licensee J. Harper, as FDIC of “Memorial Funeral Home and Cremation Service,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(0(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

82. Licensee J. Harper, as FDIC of “Memorial Funeral Home and Cremation Service,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

83. “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and. its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

84. “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth /Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

85. “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(l), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

86. “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

87. Licensee J. Harper, Jr., as FDIC of “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

88. Licensee J. Harper, Jr., as FDIC of “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

89. Licensee J. Harper, Jr., as FDIC of “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

90. Licensee J. Harper, Jr., as FDIC of “Moore & Sons Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

91. “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

92. “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

93. “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

94. “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation. of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

95. Licensee M. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

96. Licensee M. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

97. Licensee M. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

98. Licensee M. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon Rose Hill Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

99. “Alonzo Funeral Home, Inc.,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

100. “Alonzo Funeral Home, Inc.,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/ Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

101. “Alonzo Funeral Home, Inc.,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

102. “Alonzo Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third

party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

103. Licensee R. Amalla, as FDIC of “Alonzo Funeral Home, Inc.,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

104. Licensee R. Amalla, as FDIC of “Alonzo Funeral Home, Inc.,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

105. Licensee R. Amalia, as FDIC of “Alonzo Funeral Home, Inc.,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

106. Licensee R. Amalla, as FDlC of “Alonzo Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

107. “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L). and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

108. “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

109. “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

110. “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

111. Licensee M. Wilfong, as FDIC of “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

112. Licensee M. Wilfong, as FDIC of “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

113. Licensee M. Wilfong, as FDIC of “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

114. Licensee M. Wilfong, as FDIC of “Bean-Massey-Burge Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and

Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

115. “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH # 00003), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

116. “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH # 00003), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

117. “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH # 00003), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

118. Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home (FH # 00003), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

119. “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH # 00640), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

120. “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH # 00640), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

121. “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH # 00640), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

122. “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH # 00640), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

123. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00003), engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

124. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00640), engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena-Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

125. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00003), used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

126. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00003), permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

127. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00064), used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

128. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00064), permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

129. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00003) permitted employees and/or agents to, embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

130. Licensee G. Underwood, as FDIC of “Boze-Mitchell Funeral Home” (FH 00064), permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

131. “Cook-Walden/Davis Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

132. “Cook-Walden/Davis Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial

embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

133. Licensee C. Corbin, as FDIC of “Cook-Walden/Davis Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

134. Licensee C. Corbin, as FDIC of “Cook-Walden/Davis Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

135. “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

136. “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

137. “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/ Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby vitiated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

138. “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section

3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(0(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

139. “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

140. Licensee D. Stapleton, as FDIC of “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

141. Licensee D. Stapleton, as FDIC of “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

142. Licensee D. Stapleton, as FDIC of “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

143. Licensee D. Stapleton, as FDIC of “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

144. Licensee D. Stapleton, as FDIC of “Grove Hill Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and

Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

145. “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

146. “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

147. “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

148. “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

149. Licensee J. Garcia, Jr., as FDIC of “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

150. Licensee J. Garcia, Jr., as FDIC of “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

151. Licensee J. Garcia, Jr., as FDIC of “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

152. Licensee J. Garcia, Jr., as FDIC of “Lamar & Smith Funeral Directors,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

153. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

154. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

155. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

156. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 00400), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or

by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4.582b.

157. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

158. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

159. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

160. “Lucas Funeral Home” (FH # 01015), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

161. “Memorial Funeral Home” (FH # 01767), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

162. “Memorial Funeral Home” (FH # 01767), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

163. “Memorial Funeral Home” (FH # 01767), through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

164. “Memorial Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

165. “Metcalf Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

166. “Metcalf Funeral Directors” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

167. Licensee K. Dubose, as FDIC of “Metcalf Funeral Directors,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

168. Licensee K. Dubose, as FDIC of “Metcalf Funeral Directors,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a

commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

169. “Moore Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

170. “Moore Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

171. “Moore Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

172. “Moore Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

173. Licensee J. Shive, as FDIC of “Moore Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

174. Licensee J. Shive, as FDIC of “Moore Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

175. Licensee J. Shive, as FDIC of “Moore Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

176. Licensee J. Shive, as FDIC of “Moore Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

177. “Rhoton Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

178. “Rhoton Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

179. “Rhoton Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

180. “Rhoton Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

181. Licensee G. Fonzo, as FDIC of “Rhoton Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

182. Licensee G. Fonzo, as FDIC of “Rhoton Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

183. Licensee G. Fonzo, as FDIC of “Rhoton Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

184. Licensee G. Fonzo, as FDIC of “Rhoton Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

185. “Shannon North Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

186. “Shannon North Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

187. “Shannon North Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act-or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

188. “Shannon North Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

189. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

190. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

191. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

192. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

193. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon North Funeral Chapel,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

194. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon North Funeral Chapel,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

195. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon North Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

196. Licensee C. Shannon, as FDIC of “Shannon North Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

197. “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

198. “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

199. “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

200. “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

201. Licensee H. Lee Nelson, as FDIC of “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

202. Licensee H. Lee Nelson, as FDIC of “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

203. Licensee H. Lee Nelson, as FDIC of “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

204. Licensee H. Lee Nelson, as FDIC of “Shannon Rufe Snow Drive Funeral Chapel,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

205. “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

206. “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/ Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

207. “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

208. “Shannon TCU Funeral Chapel,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

209. “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

210. “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

211. “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

212. “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

213. “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

214. Licensee J. Kurtz, as FDIC of “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

215. Licensee J. Kurtz, as FDIC of “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” used the services of “Dallas Embalming Services,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26). and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

216. Licensee J. Kurtz, as FDIC of “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

217. Licensee J. Kurtz, as FDIC of “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

218. Licensee J. Kurtz, as FDIC of “Sparkman Funeral Directors,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

219. “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

220. “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

221. “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

222. “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

223. Licensee M. Capehart, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful

performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

224. Licensee M. Capehart, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

225. Licensee M. Capehart, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

226. Licensee M. Capehart, as FDIC of “Sparkman-Dickey Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

227. “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and Us employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

228. “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

229. “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

230. “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

231. “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

232. Licensee B. Rice, as FDIC of “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

233. Licensee B. Rice, as FDIC of “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” used the services of “Dallas Embalming Service,” which permitted provisional licensees to embalm without personal supervision in violation of Sections 3(D)(1), 3(H)(20), 3(H)(26), and 3(H)(27), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.6, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

234. Licensee B. Rice, as FDIC of “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

235. Licensee B. Rice, as FDIC of “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

236. Licensee B. Rice, as FDIC of “Sparkman/Hillcrest Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

237. “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

238. “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

239. “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, committed a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

240. “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” through its FDIC and employees and/or agents, embalmed without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(D)(1)(b), Article 4582b.

241. Licensee R Toon, as FDIC of “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the Commission pursuant to Section 2(L) and Section 6(D), Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 201.7(b), thereby obstructing the Commission and its employees in the lawful performance of their duties in enforcing Article 4582b and Commission rules, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Sections 3(H)(25) and 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

242. Licensee R. Toon, as FDIC of “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” used the services of one or more of the following entities: “Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas,” “Dallas/Fort Worth Mortuary Service,” “Dallas Embalming Service,” “Lucas Hurst Embalming Division,” or “Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division,” all of which violated Section 4(C), Article 4582b by operating as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmers establishment license, and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

243. Licensee R. Toon, as FDIC of “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to commit a deceptive act or practice in not advising consumers that the price being charged for embalming is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider, in violation of Commission Rule 203.8(f)(1), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

244. Licensee R. Toon, as FDIC of “Ted Dickey Funeral Home,” permitted employees and/or agents to embalm without proper authority a dead human body, in violation of Section 3(H)(11A), Article 4582b, by failing to disclose to consumers when oral authorization to embalm was obtained that embalming services were to be performed at another facility or by a third party, in violation of Section 4A, Article 4582b, and Commission Rule 203.22(d), and thereby violated Section 4(E) and Section 3(H)(26), Article 4582b.

The findings issued by the CRC included that certain SCI affiliated funeral homes had used the services of Professional Morticians of Fort Worth/Dallas, Dallas Embalming Service, Lucas Hurst Embalming Division, and/or Sparkman-Crane Embalming Division; had illegally operated as a commercial embalmer without a commercial embalmer’s license; and/or operated under a name different than the name under which the establishment was licensed. Additionally, the CRC found that certain SCI affiliates had engaged in unprofessional conduct by failing to comply with the subpoena duces tecum issued by TFSC. In total, the TFSC assessed approximately $450,000 against the twenty SCI affiliates. The CRC also found that certain provisional licensees who had worked at SCI affiliates had embalmed without proper supervision.

The day after the CRC meeting, on August 4, 1998, May received a telephone call from an acquaintance, Dennis Garza reporting that an investigator, Robert Madeira, (an employee of SCI) had contacted him. Garza reported that the investigator had told him that he was conducting an investigation of May, that the investigator had been given Garza’s name, among others, by SCI’s counsel, Johnnie B. Rogers, and that he was looking for “dirt” on May. The investigator asked Garza whether May had had problems with previous employers, and to tell him everything he knew about May’s civic and political activities. May learned later that other friends and acquaintances had been contacted by SCI’s investigator and were asked for the same basic information. May, of course, was quite disturbed by SCI’s actions in undertaking an investigation into her private life and activities. (On July 13, 1998, SCI also had made an “open records” request, improperly – as the Texas Attorney General’s office later ruled – attempting to obtain TFSC personnel files.)

That Waltrip and SCI would call May’s known friends and acquaintances, and openly announce that they were digging for “dirt” on her, was obviously yet another attempt to retaliate against, pressure, harass, coerce, and intimidate May, and cause her severe mental distress, and to interfere with and halt the TFSC investigation of SCI.

Further cause for concern came in the form of a report from the TFSC building cleaning crew. This crew reported to May that on the weekend of July 25, 1998, an unknown, unidentified man apparently tried to gain unauthorized entry into TFSC’s offices.

Concerned about SCI’s highly improper, intimidating, broad-scale investigation into her private life, May reported this investigation to the Texas Attorney General’s office and contacted the Texas Department of Public Safety, who advised her to tell her friends and acquaintances not to meet with the SCI investigator. Further, on August 4, 1998, May sent letters to Whitmire and to Allbaugh, informing them of SCI’s personal investigation of her and of her increasing concern for her personal safety and for the safety of the TFSC staff. Consistent with their ongoing efforts to aid SCI’s and Waltrip’s continued illegal acts, to cover up those acts, and to interfere with and impede the TFSC investigation of SCI, neither Whitmire nor Allbaugh took any action to stop the abusive SCI conduct.

In fact, on August 5, 1998, Allbaugh called May to set up a meeting for August 6. On August 6, Allbaugh’s office called and canceled the meeting, resetting it for August 10. On August 10, 1998, May reported to Allbaugh, hoping that he and the Governor would demonstrate some concern about the coercive, intimidating investigation that SCI had launched into her personal life, and the flagrant attempts by Waltrip and/or SCI to intimidate her into somehow halting the investigation of SCI affiliated funeral homes. May was accompanied to the meeting by B.J. Miller, a TFSC staff member, but Allbaugh refused to let Miller even enter his office, loudly and rudely stating to May that “This is between you and me!” In their meeting, Allbaugh accused May of “mistrust,” and rather than indicating any concern about SCI’s investigation of May or about the multiple violations of the law that May had reported to Allbaugh and other members of the Governor’s staff, and to the Attorney General, and to the Commission, Allbaugh simply demanded more information about the status of the SCI investigation and finally announced that “This isn’t going anywhere.” He then made it quite clear the meeting was ended and May was dismissed.

On or about August 12, 1998, political operative Bill Miller called May, said he was representing SCI, and scheduled a meeting with May for August 14. Miller indicated that the wanted to “make this thing go away.” (This was the day after press reports were published concerning the illegal investigation.) He also said that he had taken steps to stop the SCI investigation of May’s personal activities.

On August 17, 1998, Whitmire, again apparently at the behest of SCI, the client of his law firm, again called May, this time to demand that TFSC agree to a procedure for SCI to “mediate” its fine. Even though the TFSC still had not received all of the information needed for the investigation, at a Commission meeting on September 24, 1998, the TFSC agreed to conduct a mediation, as SCI demanded. SCI insisted that the mediation be conducted by an SCI-selected mediator. The mediation was scheduled for December 17-18, 1998. The mediation occurred the, but did not settle the matters in issue.

SCI’s mediation gambit having failed, SCI then followed with the next logical, albeit improper, step – the destruction of May’s position at the TFSC. On January 14, 1999, McNeil told May that Metcalf was working to get May placed on administrative leave or otherwise disciplined. Metcalf was employing his usual tactic of contacting other commissioners to discuss the issue in apparent violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act. May objected to this procedure. Nonetheless, it became clear that the ongoing harassment, abuse, and retaliation was leading to May’s ultimate termination, based upon the interference and pressure from Waltrip, SCI, Metcalf, Duncan, and Governor Bush’s office. On January 25, 1999, the TFSC did indeed place May on administrative leave, and on February 8, 1999, the TFSC Commissioners voted to terminate May’s employment. Prior to the public announcement of the TFSC’s decision to terminate May, the Commissioners met in executive session for an hour. At one point, McNeil came out of the meeting and spoke to Bill Miller, SCI’s representative, and told him that he should “stick around and decide for yourself if we made the right decision.” Shortly thereafter, the Commissioners reconvened in public session and announced that they were terminating May’s employment immediately. SCI employees Metcalf and Duncan, of course, participated in the vote to terminate May.

Thereafter, apparently following up on Waltrip’s repeated threats to abolish the TFSC, the Appropriations Committee of the Texas House of Representatives voted on March 1, 1999, to defund TFSC entirely, effectively beginning the legislative process for the final destruction of the agency. As it turned out, the agency was not abolished completely, but SCI and/or Waltrip was effective in passing final legislation, approved by the Governor, which stripped the TFSC of certain investigatory and regulatory powers and tools.

At various times May made reports of legal violations discussed above to the Commissioners, to Governor Bush, to the Austin Police Department, to the Texas Attorney General, and to the Texas Department of Public Safety, among others. The conduct she reported violated multiple statutes and rules, including the following provisions:

- Article 4582b, § 1(D) – “. . . The placing of any . . . chemicals or substances on or in a dead human body by any person who is not a licensed embalmer shall be deemed a violation of this Act, provided that this shall not apply to a provisional licensee working under the supervision of a licensed embalmer. All persons who are engaged in the business of embalming or who profess to be engaged in such business, or hold themselves out to the public as embalmers, shall be licensed embalmers.”

- Article 4582b, § 1(E) – “The term ‘provisional licensee’ as herein used is a person engaged in learning the practice of funeral directing and/or embalming under the instruction, direction, and personal supervision of a duly licensed funeral director and/or embalmer of and in the State of Texas in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and having been duly issued a provisional license by the commission prior thereto.”

- Article 4582b, § 2(A)(4) – “A commissioner or an agent of the commission who carries out the functions of the commission may not communicate directly or indirectly with a party or the party’s representative to a proceeding pending before the commission unless notice and an opportunity to participate is given to all parties to the proceeding, if the commissioner or agent is assigned to make a decision, a finding of fact, or a conclusion of law in the proceeding.”

- Article 4582b, § 2(A)(6) – “No person shall be appointed to the commission who is an officer or employee of a corporation or other business entity controlling or operating, directly or indirectly, more than three funeral establishments, if another commissioner is also an officer or employee of the same corporation or other business entity.”

- Article 4582b, § 2(K) – “All meetings of the commission shall be open and public . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 2(L) – “The commission may issue, or delegate to the executive director the power to issue subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 2(O) – “The commission is subject to the open meetings law . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 3(A) – “The commission is hereby authorized and empowered and it shall be its duty to prescribe and maintain a standard of proficiency, professionalism, and qualifications of those engaged or who may engage in the practice of a funeral director or embalmer and to determine the qualifications necessary to enable any person to lawfully practice as a funeral director, to embalm dead human bodies, and to collect the fees therefor. The commission shall examine all applicants for funeral directors’ and embalmers’ licenses and for provisional licenses and shall issue the proper license to all personal qualified and who meet the requirements herein prescribed.”

- Article 4582b, § 3(C)(1)(d) – “To be eligible for a license to practice embalming, an applicant must: . . . have served as a provisional licensee for one year under the personal supervision of a licensed embalmer . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 3(D)(1) – “It shall be the duty of the commission to prescribe and supervise the course of instruction received by a provisional licensee while participating in a provisional license program, consistent with the following requirements: 1. Provisional license for embalmer: A license to practice the science of embalming shall not be issued unless and until the applicant therefore has served a provisional license program of not less than twelve (12) consecutive months under the personal supervision and instruction of a licensed embalmer and has successfully completed all requirements of the program . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 3(D)(5) – “It shall be the duty of the commission to prescribe and supervise the course of instruction received by a provisional licensee while participating in a provisional license program, consistent with the following requirements: 5. A provisional licensee is subject to the same disciplinary actions as a holder of a funeral director or embalmer license for a violation of this Act or a rule adopted under this Act.”

- Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “ . . . A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . 4. The use of any statement that misleads or deceives the public, including but not limited to false or misleading statements regarding . . . (4) representations as to licensed personnel in the operation of a funeral establishment . . . 11A. Embalming or attempting to embalm without proper authority a dead human body . . . 19. Performing acts of funeral directing or embalming, as those terms are defined in this Act, that are outside the licensed scope and authority of the licensee, or performing acts of funeral directing or embalming in a capacity other than that of an employee, agent, subcontractor, or assignee of a licensed funeral establishment that has contracted to perform those act . . . 20. Engaging in fraudulent, unprofessional, or deceptive conduct in providing funeral services or merchandise to a consumer . . . 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . 27. Dishonest conduct, willful conduct, negligence, or gross negligence in the practice of embalming or funeral directing that is likely to or does deceive, defraud, or otherwise injure the public.”

- Article 4582b § 3(H)(11A) – “A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . (11A) [e]mbalming or attempting to embalm without proper authority, a dead human body.”

- Article 4582b § 3(H)(20) – “A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . (20) [e]ngaging in fraudulent, unprofessional, or deceptive conduct in providing funeral services or merchandise to a consumer.”

- Article 4582b § 3(H)(25) – “A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . (25) [f]ailure to retain and make available to the commission, upon request, copies of all price lists, written notices, embalming documents, and memoranda of agreement required . . . for two (2) years after the date of their distribution or signing”

- Article 4582b § 3(H)(26) – “A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . (26) [v]iolation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . .”

- Article 4582b § 3(H)(27) – “A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . (27) [d]ishonest conduct, willful conduct, negligence or gross negligence in the practice of embalming or funeral directing that is likely to or does deceive, defraud, or otherwise injure the public.”

- Article 4582b, § 4(B) – operating a funeral home without a proper and valid license.

- Article 4582b, § 4(C) – “It is expressly provided, however, that an establishment which functions solely as a commercial embalmer, as that term is defined in this Act, shall have a commercial embalmers establishment license . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 4(C) – “Each funeral establishment shall be required to have a physical plant . . . consisting of the following: (1) . . . facilities in which funeral services may be conducted; (4) [a] preparation room containing facilities, equipment and supplies required by commission rule to ensure the provision of adequate embalming services . . . (8) [a] physical plant . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 4(D)(1) – “ . . . A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . (a) Failure of a funeral establishment to substantially comply with . . . this Section; (b) Failure by any person associated with the funeral establishment, whether as an employee, agent, subcontractor, assignee, owner, or otherwise, and whether licensed or unlicensed, to comply with this Act or a rule adopted under this Act.”

- Article 4582b, § 4(E) – “Each funeral establishment shall designate . . . a funeral director in charge, and such funeral director in charge shall be directly responsible for the funeral directing and embalming business of the licensee. The funeral director in charge is ultimately responsible for compliance with the mortuary laws. The funeral director in charge may be charged with a violation of this Act if a violation occurs in the funeral establishment.”

- Article 4582b, § 4(G)(1) – “Any premises on which funeral directing or embalming is practiced shall be open at all times to inspection for violations of this Act . . . by any agent of the commission . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 4A – “A copy of the written consent . . . [for embalming] . . . shall be retained for a minimum of two years by the funeral home.”

- Article 4582b, § 6A – “A person commits an offense if the person: (1) acts or holds himself out as a funeral director, embalmer, or provisional licensee, as those terms are defined in this Act, without being properly licensed under this Act . . . .”

- Article 4582b, § 6D – “(a) The commission shall investigate each complaint received by the commission relating to a funeral director, [or] embalmer . . . .”

- TFSC Regulations, § 201.13 – “(a) Any premise on which embalming or funeral directing is conducted shall be open at all times to inspection under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 4582b . . . by any agent of the commission . . . (d) Inspections shall be unannounced . . . .”

- TFSC Regulations, § 203.6(a) – “Participants in the provisional licensure program may serve as provisional licensees only in funeral establishments or commercial embalming establishments licensed by the commission, and all work must be performed under the direct and personal supervision of a duly licensed funeral director or embalmer, depending on the provisional license . . . .”

- TFSC Regulations, § 203.8(f)(1) – “[I]t is a deceptive act or practice for a funeral provider to: (A) represent that the price charged for a cash advance item is the same as the cost to the funeral provider when such is [not] the case; (B) fail to disclose to persons arranging funerals that the price being charged for a cash advance item is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider for the item when such is the case.”

- TFSC Regulations, § 203.16(a)(1) – “Embalming shall be performed only by embalmers licensed by the commission, in properly equipped and licensed establishments . . . .”

- TFSC Regulations, § 203.22(d) – “One of [the specified] disclosure forms . . . must be signed by family when written authorization is secured if embalming is performed.”

- TFSC Regulations, § 203.29(a) – “In order to prohibit false, misleading, or deceptive practices, each licensed funeral home shall select and indicate to the commission the one name under which the funeral home is to be licensed (it may be a trade name), and no licensed funeral establishment may use any name other than the one under which the license is issued by the commission.”

- Texas Business and Commerce Code, §15.05 – “(a) Every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce is unlawful. (b) It is unlawful for any person to monopolize, attempt to monopolize, or conspire to monopolize any part of trade or commerce. . . . (d) It is unlawful for any person to acquire, directly or indirectly, the whole or any part of the stock or other share capital or the assets of any other person or persons, where the effect of such acquisition may be to lessen competition substantially in any line of trade or commerce.”

- Texas Business and Commerce Code, §17.46 – “(a) False, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful and are subject to action by the consumer protection division . . . . (b) . . . [T]he term ‘false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices’ includes, but is not limited to the following acts: (1) passing off goods or services as those of another; (2) causing confusion or misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services; (3) causing confusion or misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or association with, or certification by, another; (4) using deceptive representations or designations of geographic origin in connection with goods or services; (5) representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they do not have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection which he does not; . . . (23) the failure to disclose information concerning goods or services which was known at the time of the transaction if such failure to disclose such information was intended to induce the consumer into a transaction into which the consumer would not have entered had the information been disclosed . . . .”

- Texas Business and Commerce Code, § 17.50(a) – “A consumer may maintain an action where any of the following constitute a producing cause of economic damages or damages for mental anguish: (1) the use or employment by any person of a false, misleading, or deceptive act or practice that is: (A) specifically enumerated in a subdivision of Subsection (b) of Section 17.46 of this subchapter; and (B) relied on by a consumer to the consumer’s detriment; . . . (3) any unconscionable action or course of action by any person.”

- Texas Government Code, § 551.002 – “Every regular, special, or called meeting of a governmental body shall be open to the public, except as provided by this chapter.”

- Texas Government Code, § 551.041 – “A governmental body shall give written notice of the date, hour, place, and subject of each meeting held by the governmental body.”

- Texas Government Code, § 551.144(a) – “A member of a governmental body commits an offense if a closed meeting is not permitted under this chapter and the member knowingly: (1) calls or aids in calling or organizing the closed meeting . . . or (3) participates in the closed meeting . . . .”

- Texas Government Code, § 572.001(a) – “It is the policy of this state that a state officer or state employee may not have a direct or indirect interest, including financial and other interests, or engage in a business transaction or a professional activity, or incur any obligation of any nature that is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of the officer’s or employee’s duties in the public interest.”

- Texas Government Code, § 572.051 – “A state officer or employee should not: (1) accept or solicit any gift, favor, or service that might reasonably tend to influence the officer or employee in the discharge of official duties or that the officer or employee knows or should know is being offered with the intent to influence the officer’s or employee’s official conduct; (2) accept other employment or engage in a business or professional activity that the officer or employee might reasonably expect would require or induce the officer or employee to disclose confidential information acquired by reason of the official position; (3) accept other employment or compensation that could reasonably be expected to impair the officer’s or employee’s independence of judgment in the performance of the officer’s or employee’s official duties; (4) make personal investments that could reasonably be expected to create a substantial conflict between the officer’s or employee’s private interest and the public interest; or (5) intentionally or knowingly solicit, accept, or agree to accept any benefit for having exercised the officer’s or employee’s official powers or performed the officer’s or employee’s official duties in favor of another.”

- Texas Government Code, § 572.058(a) – “An election or appointed officer . . . who is a member of a . . . commission having policy direction over a state agency and who has a personal or private interest in a measure, proposal, or decision pending before the board or commission shall publicly disclose the fact to the . . . commission in a meeting called and held in compliance with Chapter 551. The officer may not vote or otherwise participate in the decision.”

- Texas Penal Code, § 32.42(b) – “A person commits an offense if in the course of business he intentionally, recklessly, or with criminal negligence commits one or more of the following deceptive business practices: . . . (5) passing off property or service as that of another; . . . (12) making a materially false or misleading statement: . . . in connection with the purchase or sale of property or service.”

- Texas Penal Code, § 36.03(a) – “A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he: (1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant’s known legal duty . . . .”

- Texas Penal Code, § 3604(a) – “A person commits an offense if he privately addresses a representation, entreaty, argument, or other communication to any public servant who exercises or will exercise official discretion in an adjudicatory proceeding with an intent to influence the outcome of the proceeding on the basis of considerations other than those authorized by law.”

- Texas Penal Code, § 36.06(a) – “A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly harms or threatens to harm another by an unlawful act: (1) in retaliation for or on account of the service or status of another as a: (A) public servant . . .; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime; or (2) to prevent or delay the service of another as a: (A) public servant . . .; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime.”

- Texas Penal Code, § 36.08 – “(a) A public servant in an agency performing regulatory functions or conducting inspections or investigations commits an offense if he solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept any benefit from a person the public servant knows to be subject to regulation, inspection, or investigation by the public servant or his agency . . . (c) A public servant in an agency carrying on civil or criminal litigation on behalf of government commits an offense if he solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept any benefit from a person against whom the public servant knows litigation is pending or contemplated by the public servant or his agency.”

- Texas Penal Code, § 37.09(a) – “(a) A person commits an offense if, knowing that an investigation or official proceeding is pending or in progress, he: (1) alters, destroys, or conceals any record, document, or thing with intent to impair its verity, legibility, or availability as evidence in the investigation or official proceeding; . . . .”

- Texas Penal Code, § 39.02(a) – “A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly: (1) violates a law relating to the public servant’s office or employment . . . .”

- Texas Penal Code, § 39.03(a) – “A public servant acting under color of his office . . . commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally subjects another to mistreatment . . . that he knows is unlawful; (2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, or power . . . knowing his conduct is unlawful . . . .”

- Texas Penal Code, § 7.02 – “(a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if: . . . (2) acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense; or (3) having a legal duty to prevent commission of the offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission, he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the offense. (b) If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit one felony, another felony is committed by one of the conspirators, all conspirators are guilty of the felony actually committed, though having no intent to commit it, if the offense was committed in furtherance of the unlawful purpose and was one that should have been anticipated as a result of the carrying out of the conspiracy.”

- Texas Penal Code, § 15.02(a) – “A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed: (1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and (2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement.”

- Texas Government Code, § 554.002(a) – “A state . . . governmental entity may not suspend or terminate the employment of, or take other adverse personnel action against, a public employee who in good faith reports a violation of law by the employing governmental entity or another public employee to an appropriate law enforcement authority.”

May’s reports of illegal conduct included the following:

A. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified below – that SCI violated the law and TFSC rules and regulations by failing and refusing to comply with TFSC subpoenas properly issued with respect to the pending investigation of SCI and SCI affiliates. SCI then falsely attempted to justify its illegal refusal to comply with the subpoenas by, among other things, conspiring with Commissioners Metcalf and Duncan, Robert Waltrip, Governor Bush, and Senator Whitmire (and possibly other legislators), to interfere with, impede and halt the investigation of SCI and SCI affiliates and, for example, to improperly attack the actions of TFSC, its staff and May. (Note also that May reported that while all SCI affiliates refused to comply with the subpoenas, all non-SCI entities complied.)

3/30/98 May reported to Eric Wright, Senate Finance Committee Director

4/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

4/16/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

5/12/98 May reported to Senator John Whitmire

5/13/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

5/14/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

5/18/98 May reported to Senator Gonzolo Barrientios

5/19/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Article 4582b, § 2(L) – “The commission may issue, or delegate to the executive director the power to issue, subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum. . . .”

22 Tex. Admin. code § 201.7.(b) – “The executive director shall have the power to issue subpoenas and subpoena duces tecum to compel . . . the production of books, records, and documents.”

Article 4582b, § 2(A)(4) – “A commissioner . . . may not communicate directly or indirectly with a party or a party’s representative to a proceeding pending before the commission unless notice and an opportunity to participate is given to all parties. . . .”

Tex. Gov’t Code § 572.058 – “An . . . appointed officer . . . who is a member of a board or commission having policy direction over a state agency and who has a personal or private interest in a . . . decision pending before the board or commission shall publicly disclose the fact to the board or commission . . . . The officer may not vote or otherwise participate in the decision. The disclosure shall be entered in the minutes of the meeting.”

Op. Tex. Att’y Gen. No. JM – 424 (1986) – “[A] . . . public official commits an offense [with respect to Article 988b] if he knowingly: . . . participates in a vote or decision on a matter involving a business entity in which the . . . public official has a substantial interest if it is reasonably foreseeable that an action on the matter would confer an economic benefit to the business entity involved . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 2(5) – “Two commissioners may participate in any informal conference relating to a case . . . [but, o]ne of the two commissioners must be a licensed funeral director or embalmer and one must be a public member. . . .”

Article 4582b, § 3(D)(1) – “It shall be the duty of the commission to prescribe and supervise the course of instruction received by a provisional licensee while participating in a provisional license program, consistent with the following requirements: 1. Provisional license for embalmer: A license to practice the science of embalming shall not be issued unless and until the applicant therefore has served a provisional license program of not less than twelve (12) consecutive months under the personal supervision and instruction of a licensed embalmer and has successfully completed all requirements of the program. . . .”

Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 4(D)(1) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . (b) Failure by any person associated with the funeral establishment, whether as an employee, agent, subcontractor, assignee, owner, or otherwise, and whether licensed or unlicensed, to comply with this Act or a rule adopted under this Act.”

FTC Funeral Industry Practices Rule, 16 CFR §453.2(a)(5) – “[Any itemized statement for funeral goods and services must contain s]pecifically itemized cash advance items.”

FTC Funeral Industry Practice Rule, 16 CFR §453.3(f) – “[It is a deceptive act or practice to r]epresent that the price charged for a cash advance item is the same as the cost to the funeral provider for the item when such is not the case. [It is also a deceptive act to f]ail to disclose . . . that the price being charged for a cash advance item is not the same as the cost to the funeral provider for the item when such is the case.”

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.46(a)(1) – “‘[F]alse, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices’ include[] . . . passing off goods and services as those of another;”

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.46(a)(2) – “‘[F]alse, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices’ include[] . . . causing confusion or misunderstanding as to the source . . . of goods or services;”

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.46(a)(23) – “‘[F]alse, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices’ include[] . . . the failure to disclose information concerning goods or services which is known at the time of the transaction if such failure to disclose such information was intended to induce the consumer into a transaction into which the consumer would not have entered had the information been disclosed;”

Article 4582b, § 6D – “(a) The commission shall investigate each complaint received by the commission relating to a funeral director, [or] embalmer . . . .”

Texas Penal Code, § 39.02(a) – “A public servant commits an offense if, with intent to obtain a benefit or with intent to harm or defraud another, he intentionally or knowingly: (1) violates a law relating to the public servant’s office or employment . . . .”

Texas Penal Code, § 39.03(a) – “A public servant acting under color of his office . . . commits an offense if he: . . . (2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, or power . . . knowing his conduct is unlawful . . . .”

Texas Penal Code, § 7.02 – “(a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if: . . . (2) acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense; or (3) having a legal duty to prevent commission of the offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission, he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the offense.”

Texas Penal Code, § 15.02(a) – “A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed: (1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and (2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement.”

B. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified below – that Commissioners Metcalf and Duncan, employees or agents of SCI or SCI affiliates, assisted SCI in violating and refusing to comply with TFSC subpoenas concerning the pending investigation of SCI and SCI affiliates, and then falsely attempted to justify SCI’s illegal refusal to comply with the subpoenas by, among other things, conspiring with or on behalf of SCI with Robert Waltrip, Governor Bush and legislators including, but not limited to Senator John Whitmire, to turn improperly the focus of the investigation from SCI and SCI affiliates to the actions of TFSC, its staff, and May.

3/30/98 May reported to Eric Wright, Senate Finance Committee Director

4/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

4/16/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

5/12/98 May reported to Senator John Whitmire

5/13/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

5/14/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

5/18/98 May reported to Senator Gonzolo Barrientios

5/19/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Article 4582b, § 2(L) – “The commission may issue, or delegate to the executive director the power to issue, subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum. . . .”

22 Tex. Admin. code § 201.7.(b) – “The executive director shall have the power to issue subpoenas and subpoena duces tecum to compel . . . the production of books, records, and documents.”

Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . .”

FTC Funeral Industry Practices Rule, 16 CFR §453.2(a)(5) – “[Any itemized statement for funeral goods and services must contain s]pecifically itemized cash advance items.”

Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.46(a)(1) – “‘[F]alse, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices’ include[] . . . passing off goods and services as those of another;”

Article 4582b, § 6D – “(a) The commission shall investigate each complaint received by the commission relating to a funeral director, [or] embalmer . . . .”

C. May reported – on the dates and to the person identified below – that Commissioners Metcalf and Duncan assisted SCI in obstructing TFSC inspections, and conspired with SCI and Robert Waltrip to achieve that goal.

4/10/98 May reported to Rep. Kyle Janek

4/12/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

4/22/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

4/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

4/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

5/5/98 May reported to Commissioner Keegan

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

5/12/98 May reported to Senator John Whitmire

5/13/98 May reported to Commissioners McNeil, Keegan, Rhymes, Kizer, Collins, King & Hughes

5/18/98 May reported to Senator Gonzolo Barrientios

5/19/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/98 May reported to Susan Dryer, State Auditor’s office

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

22 Tex. Admin. code § 201.13 – “(a) Any premise on which embalming or funeral directing is conducted shall be open at all times to inspection under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 4582b . . . by any agent of the commission. . . . (d) Inspections shall be unannounced. . . .”

Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 6D – “(a) The commission shall investigate each complaint received by the commission relating to a funeral director, [or] embalmer . . . .”

D. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified below – the attempts of Commissioners Metcalf and Duncan to influence investigations and compliance inspections involving SCI licensees (i.e., those in which they had a private interest), including frequently calling TFSC staff within 48 hours of an inspection or investigation to challenge inspection procedures or findings.

2 to 4/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

4/3/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

4/16/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

4/98 May reported to Polly Sowell, Governor Bush staff

4/98 May reported to Clay Johnson, Governor Bush staff

1998 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/5/98 May reported to Commissioner Keegan

5/18/98 May reported to Senator Gonzolo Barrientios

5/5-6/98 May reported to Commissioners on the Employee Grievance Committee

5/7/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/12/98 May reported to Senator John Whitmire

5/19/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Article 4582b, § 6D – “(a) The commission shall investigate each complaint received by the commission relating to a funeral director, [or] embalmer . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . .”

Texas Penal Code, § 7.02 – “(a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if: . . . having a legal duty to prevent commission of the offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission, he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the offense.”

E. May reported – on the dates and to the person identified below – that Commissioners Duncan and Metcalf simultaneously served as TFSC commissioners, even though they both worked for the same company – SCI, the largest funeral company in the world.

8/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

10/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

10/98 May reported to Commissioners Keegan and Rhymes

3 to 4/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

3 to 4/98 May reported to Senator Gonzolo Barrientios

4/98 May reported to Polly Sowell, Governor Bush staff

4/98 May reported to Clay Johnson, Governor Bush staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Article 4582b, § 2(A)(6) – “No person shall be appointed to the commission who is an officer or employee of a corporation or other business entity controlling or operating, directly or indirectly, more than three funeral establishments, if another commissioner is also an officer or employee of the same corporation or other business entity.”

Op. Tex. Att’y Gen. No. H – 1065 (1977) – “No member shall be appointed to the Board [of the TFSC] who is an officer o[r] employee of a corporation or other business entity controlling or operating directly or indirectly, more than three funeral establishments, if another member of the Board is also an officer or employee of the same corporation or other business entity.”

. . .

“It is plain that the Legislature wished to prevent . . . Board domination by representatives of any single chain of establishments . . . .”

. . .

“A member of the . . . Board . . . who changes employment so as to become an employee of a corporation that owns or operates more than three funeral establishments and that already employs another member of the Board vacates his Board membership by becoming so employed.”

F. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified below – that Commissioners Duncan and Metcalf violated and aided SCI and its employees and agents in violating Texas laws and in covering up, and attempting to cover up, those violations, in failing to take proper actions to enforce licensing laws, and in conspiring with SCI to achieve those goals.

1/28/98 May reported to all Commissioners

1/28/98 May reported to State Auditor representatives

2 and 5/98 May reported to Senator Gonzolo Barrientos

3 to 4/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

3/18/98 May reported to Senator Jane Nelson’s staff

4/16/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

4/28/98 May reported to Senator Rodney Ellis’ staff

4/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

4/98 May reported to Polly Sowell, Governor’s Office

4/98 May reported to Clay Johnson, Governor’s Office

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

5/12/98 May attempted to report to Senator John Whitmire

5/19/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor’s Office

8/4/98 May reported to Senator John Whitmire

8/4/98 May reported to Joe Allbaugh, Governor’s office

8/4/98 May reported to Margaret Wilson, Governor’s office

2 to 7/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

2 to 7/98 May reported to Sedora Jefferson, Attorney General’s office

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

FTC Funeral Industry Practices Rule, 16 CFR §453.2(a)(5) – “[Any itemized statement for funeral goods and services must contain s]pecifically itemized cash advance items.”

Article 4582b, § 1(D) – “. . . The placing of any . . . chemicals or substances on or in a dead human body by any person who is not a licensed embalmer shall be deemed a violation of this Act, provided that this shall not apply to a provisional licensee working under the supervision of a licensed embalmer. All persons who are engaged in the business of embalming or who profess to be engaged in such business, or hold themselves out to the public as embalmers, shall be licensed embalmers.”

Article 4582b, § 1(E) – “The term ‘provisional licensee’ as herein used is a person engaged in learning the practice of funeral directing and/or embalming under the instruction, direction, and personal supervision of a duly licensed funeral director and/or embalmer of and in the State of Texas in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and having been duly issued a provisional license by the commission prior thereto.”

participate in the decision. The disclosure shall be entered in the minutes of the meeting.”

Article 4582b, § 2(A)(4) – “A commissioner or an agent of the commission who carries out the functions of the commission may not communicate directly or indirectly with a party or the party’s representative to a proceeding pending before the commission unless notice and an opportunity to participate is given to all parties to the proceeding, if the commissioner or agent is assigned to make a decision, a finding of fact, or a conclusion of law in the proceeding.”

Article 4582b, § 3(A) – “The commission is hereby authorized and empowered and it shall be its duty to prescribe and maintain a standard of proficiency, professionalism, and qualifications of those engaged or who may engage in the practice of a funeral director or embalmer and to determine the qualifications necessary to enable any person to lawfully practice as a funeral director, to embalm dead human bodies, and to collect the fees therefor. The commission shall examine all applicants for funeral directors’ and embalmers’ licenses and for provisional licenses and shall issue the proper license to all persons qualified and who meet the requirements herein prescribed.”

Article 4582b, § 3(C)(1)(d) – “To be eligible for a license to practice embalming, an applicant must: . . . have served as a provisional licensee for one year under the personal supervision of a licensed embalmer . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . 4. The use of any statement that misleads or deceives the public, including but not limited to false or misleading statements regarding . . . . (4) representations as to licensed personnel in the operation of a funeral establishment. . . . 11A. Embalming or attempting to embalm without proper authority a dead human body. . . . 19. Performing acts of funeral directing or embalming, as those terms are defined in this Act, that are outside the licensed scope and authority of the licensee, or performing acts of funeral directing or embalming in a capacity other than that of an employee, agent, subcontractor, or assignee of a licensed funeral establishment that has contracted to perform those acts. . . . 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . . 27. Dishonest conduct, wilful conduct, negligence, or gross negligence in the practice of embalming or funeral directing that is likely to or does deceive, defraud, or otherwise injure the public.”

Article 4582b, § 4(C) – “It is expressly provided, however, that an establishment which functions solely as a commercial embalmer, as that term is defined in this Act, shall have a commercial embalmers establishment license . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 4(G)(1) – “Any premises on which funeral directing or embalming is practiced shall be open at all times to inspection for violations of this Act . . . by any agent of the commission . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 6A – “A person commits an offense if the person: (1) acts or holds himself out as a funeral director, embalmer, or provisional licensee, as those terms are defined in this Act, without being properly licensed under this Act . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 6D – “(a) The commission shall investigate each complaint received by the commission relating to a funeral director, [or] embalmer . . . .”

22 Tex. Admin. code § 203.6(a) – “Participants in the provisional licensure program may serve as provisional licensees only in funeral establishments or commercial embalming establishments licensed by the commission, and all work must be performed under the direct and personal supervision of a duly licensed funeral director or embalmer, depending on the provisional license. . . .”

22 Tex. Admin. code § 203.16(a)(1) – “Embalming shall be performed only by embalmers licensed by the commission, in properly equipped and licensed establishments . . . .”

22 Tex. Admin. code § 203.29(a) – “In order to prohibit false, misleading, or deceptive practices, each licensed funeral home shall select and indicate to the commission the one name under which the funeral home is to be licensed (it may be a trade name), and no licensed funeral establishment may use any name other than the one under which the license is issued by the commission.”

Texas Penal Code, § 7.02 – “(a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if: . . . (2) acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he . . . aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense; or (3) having a legal duty to prevent commission of the offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission, he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the offense.”

Texas Penal Code, § 32.42(b) – “A person commits an offense if in the course of business he intentionally, recklessly, or with criminal negligence commits one or more of the following deceptive business practices: . . . (5) passing off property or service as that of another; . . . (12) making a materially false or misleading statement: . . . in connection with the purchase or sale of property or service.”

Texas Penal Code, § 36.03(a) – “A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he: (1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant’s known legal duty . . . .”

Texas Penal Code, § 36.04(a) – “A person commits an offense if he privately addresses a representation, entreaty, argument, or other communication to any public servant who exercises or will exercise official discretion in an adjudicatory proceeding with an intent to influence the outcome of the proceeding on the basis of considerations other than those authorized by law.”

Texas Penal Code, § 36.06(a) – “A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly harms or threatens to harm another by an unlawful act: (1) in retaliation for or on account of the service or status of another as a: (A) public servant . . . ; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime; or (2) to prevent or delay the service of another as a: (A) public servant . . . ; or (B) person who has reported or who the actor knows intends to report the occurrence of a crime.”

Texas Penal Code, § 36.08 – “(a) A public servant in an agency performing regulatory functions or conducting inspections or investigations commits an offense if he solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept any benefit from a person the public servant knows to be subject to regulation, inspection, or investigation by the public servant or his agency. . . . (c) A public servant in an agency carrying on civil or criminal litigation on behalf of government commits an offense if he solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept any benefit from a person against whom the public servant knows litigation is pending or contemplated by the public servant or his agency.”

Texas Penal Code, § 39.03(a) – “A public servant acting under color of his office . . . commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally subjects another to mistreatment . . . that he knows is unlawful; (2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, or power . . . knowing his conduct is unlawful . . . .”

G. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that Commissioners Metcalf and Duncan interfered with the TFSC investigation of SCI embalming practices in the Dallas/ Fort Worth areas.

4/3/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

4/21/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/5-6/98 May reported to all Commissioners on the Employee Grievance Committee

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: . . . 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 6D – “(a) The commission shall investigate each complaint received by the commission relating to a funeral director, [or] embalmer . . . .”

Texas Penal Code, § 7.02 – “(a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense committed by the conduct of another if: . . . (2) acting with intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense, he . . . aids, or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense; or (3) having a legal duty to prevent commission of the offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission, he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the offense.”

H. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that Commissioner Metcalf contacted TFSC staff repeatedly to discuss and complain about the ongoing TFSC investigation of SCI affiliates in the Dallas/Fort Worth area (e.g., on 4/3/98 after issuance of subpoenas on SCI affiliates), when Commissioner Metcalf was an employee of SCI and thus had an obvious conflict of interest.

5/5-6/98 May reported to all Commissioners on the Employee Grievance Committee

5/5/98 May reported to Commissioner Keegan

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

4/98 May reported to Clay Johnson, Governor Bush staff

4/98 May reported to Polly Sowell, Governor Bush’s staff

5/13/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Tex. Gov’t Code § 572.001(a) – “It is the policy of this state that a state officer or state employee may not have a direct or indirect interest, including financial and other interests, or engage in a business transaction or a professional activity, or incur any obligation of any nature that is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of the officer’s or employee’s duties in the public interest.”

Texas Penal Code, § 39.03(a) – “A public servant acting under color of his office . . . commits an offense if he: . . . (2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise . . . of any right, privilege, or power . . . knowing his conduct is unlawful . . . .”

I. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that Commissioner Duncan contacted TFSC staff repeatedly to discuss and complain about the ongoing TFSC investigation of SCI affiliates in the Dallas/Fort Worth area (e.g., on 4/3/98 after issuance of subpoenas on SCI affiliates), when Commissioner Duncan was an employee of ECI (a company over which SCI exercised control after acquisition) or SCI and thus had an obvious conflict of interest.

5/5-6/98 May reported to all Commissioners on the Employee Grievance Committee

5/5/98 May reported to Commissioner Keegan

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor Bush staff

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

4/98 May reported to Clay Johnson, Governor Bush staff

4/98 May reported to Polly Sowell, Governor Bush’s staff

5/13/98 May reported to Quincy Quinlan, Attorney General’s office

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

interest if it is reasonably foreseeable that an action on the matter would confer an economic benefit to the business entity involved . . . .”

J. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that Commissioner Metcalf was involving himself in TFSC investigations and proceedings concerning SCI affiliates when he had an obvious conflict of interest.

1997-98 May reported to Rep. Dale Tillery

1997-98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

1998 May reported to Polly Sowell, Governor’s Office

4/98 May reported to Clay Johnson, Governor’s Office

5/5/98 May reported to Commissioner Keegan

4 to 5/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/5-6/98 May reported to all Commissioners on the Employee Grievance Committee

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor’s Office

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Tex. Gov’t Code§ 572.001(a) – “It is the policy of this state that a state officer or state employee may not have a direct or indirect interest, including financial and other interests, or engage in a business transaction or a professional activity, or incur any obligation of any nature that is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of the officer’s or employee’s duties in the public interest.”

K. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that Commissioner Duncan was involving himself in TFSC investigations and proceedings concerning SCI affiliates when he had an obvious conflict of interest.

1997-98 May reported to Rep. Dale Tillery

1997-98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

1998 May reported to Polly Sowell, Governor’s Office

4/98 May reported to Clay Johnson, Governor’s Office

5/5/98 May reported to Commissioner Keegan

4 to 5/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/5-6/98 May reported to all Commissioners on the Employee Grievance Committee

5/7/98 May reported to all Commissioners

5/7/98 May reported to Sylvia Abanez, Governor’s Office

5/7/98 May reported to Warren Mayberry, House Comm. on Appropriations

5/7/98 May reported to Shannon Perez, Rep. Dale Tillery staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Tex. Gov’t Code§ 572.001(a) – “It is the policy of this state that a state officer or state employee may not have a direct or indirect interest, including financial and other interests, or engage in a business transaction or a professional activity, or incur any obligation of any nature that is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of the officer’s or employee’s duties in the public interest.”

L. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that Commissioners Metcalf and Duncan engaged in improper ex parte communications concerning matters pending at TFSC, conspired with others, including, but not limited to Robert Waltrip, Governor Bush, members of Governor Bush’s staff, and legislators, including Senator John Whitmire to have such communications, and aided and abetted such communications.

5/5/98 May reported to Commissioner Keegan

4 to 5/98 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

5/5-6/98 May reported to all Commissioners on the Employee Grievance Committee

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

Article 4582b, § 2(O) – “The commission is subject to the open meetings law . . . .”

Article 4582b, § 3(H) – “. . . A violation of this Act includes the following: . . 26. Violation of this Act, [or] any rule adopted under this Act . . . .”

M. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that at SCI’s and Robert Waltrip’s insistence, Governor Bush and/or members of his staff acquiesced to demands by or on behalf of SCI and Robert Waltrip and interfered with and impeded the ongoing investigation of SCI affiliates by, among other things, directing TFSC to conduct an investigation of its own staff, as part of a continuing effort to pressure and intimidate TFSC staff, as well as to interfere with, impede, delay, and side-track the TFSC investigation of SCI.

1998 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

8/4/98 May reported to Senator John Whitmire

8/4/98 May reported to Joe Allbaugh, Governor’s staff

8/4/98 May reported to Margaret Wilson, Governor’s staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following:

N. May reported – on the dates and to the persons identified – that at SCI and Robert Waltrip’s insistence, Governor Bush and/or members of his staff acquiesced to demands by or on behalf of SCI and interfered with and impeded the ongoing investigation of SCI, by threatening and attempting to intimidate May and TFSC staff.

1998 May reported to Commissioner McNeil

8/4/98 May reported to Senator John Whitmire

8/4/98 May reported to Joe Allbaugh, Governor’s staff

8/4/98 May reported to Margaret Wilson, Governor’s staff

Such conduct apparently violated multiple laws, including the following: