Fort Worth

Fort Worth fire victims, Cooper owners reach agreement to save tenants’ property

After a six-alarm fire displaced nearly 800 residents of The Cooper apartments near downtown Fort Worth on June 23, the legal case is making progress.

Two groups of tenants filed lawsuits in August against The Cooper Fort Worth LLC, the property’s owner Lightbulb Capital Group, previous management company Cushman and Wakefield, current management RPM Living, electrical contractor Cano Electric Inc. and company owner Larry Cano, and Armando Rodelo, who is the electrician who worked on an HVAC unit and replaced a breaker on the day of the fire.

Tenants reported limited communication with the owners and the management companies about the move-out process, especially those who lived in Building 1, where most of the damage from the fire is.

After filing the first lawsuit, attorney Katie Steele of Varghese Summersett also sought a temporary restraining order to prevent the owners from removing or destroying tenants’ property from the units, or demolishing the building, and to preserve critical evidence in the case.

Miriam Zarza, a two-month resident at The Cooper apartments, holds her sign while being interviewed by the media during a protest outside the building in Fort Worth on Wednesday, July 23, 2025. Residents planned a protest to mark one month since The Cooper apartments fire displaced residents, leaving them without their belongings.
Miriam Zarza, a two-month resident at The Cooper apartments, holds her sign while being interviewed by the media during a protest outside the building in Fort Worth on Wednesday, July 23, 2025. Residents planned a protest to mark one month since The Cooper apartments fire displaced residents, leaving them without their belongings. Chris Torres ctorres@star-telegram.com

On Aug. 28, tenants and the apartments’ owner, Lightbulb Capital Group, reached an agreement that will temporarily prevent the destruction or removal of personal property in Building 1 and maintain the security of the building while stabilizing the structure, even if the work results in incidental interior damage or loss of personal property.

“This is just one step in our long fight that’s in front of us, so the claims and the allegations are still outstanding. This is just a protection moving forward for Building 1 residents,” Steele said.

Steele said this agreement has the same points as the requested restraining order would have, but worked more quickly to come to the same point.

“We felt that it was going to be in the best interest of our clients,” Steele said. “That way The Cooper can move forward with shoring of the building, which is needing to be done as soon as possible to stabilize the building, to prevent future collapse.”

Steele also said the HVAC unit was removed from the building last week so that experts could determine the source of the fire.

After the agreement was made, some tenants of Building 1 were contacted through email to let them know their units would need to be demolished, Steele said.

The letter dated Aug. 28, the same day as the agreement, stated that Camp Roofing Limited, the contractor working on the building, needed to clean out some units of any contents to work on salvaging the building. This would impact 36 units in Building 1.

“Camp is willing to make one attempt to retrieve up to five essential items from your apartment unit at the Cooper — as long as you agree to release Camp, and others — from any liability associated with its attempts to recover those essential Items,” the letter said.

The document stated that essential items include licenses, passports, Social Security cards, immigration papers, birth certificates, non-cosmetic jewelry, computers, computer drives, and family heirlooms such as photo albums, artwork and urns. The items would have to be placed in a 25-inch by 16-inch by 9-inch enclosed storage container.

“How do you limit your life to five things? And I have some clients that had three people living in an apartment,” Steele said. “So they get one and a third item per person? It’s more inhumane treatment coming from The Cooper.”

Kaleb Godwin of K. Godwin Legal, an attorney for around 90 Cooper tenants and who filed the second lawsuit, said The Cooper did not want to provide a list of the 36 units, citing tenant privacy.

“Client frustration still remains high, and it doesn’t seem like The Cooper has gotten any better at sending consistent messaging, because we’re aware of at least two units worth of tenants that got that notice that come to find out, are in fact, not a part of the shoring plan,” Godwin said. “Then we also know of at least two tenants from one unit who have not received any of this communication, and we found out today that their unit is a part of the shoring plan.”

A spokesperson for the apartments said Wednesday, “Due to the ongoing litigation related to The Cooper, we are unable to comment at this time, but we remain committed to doing everything we can to work through this very difficult situation.”

On Wednesday, the court filed a transfer order that moved both lawsuits to one court. This move may signal the possibility of consolidating the two lawsuits.

This story was originally published September 3, 2025 at 9:00 PM.

Related Stories from Fort Worth Star-Telegram
Get unlimited digital access
#ReadLocal

Try 1 month for $1

CLAIM OFFER