The First Court of Appeals has granted yet another writ of mandamus against Judge Denise Pratt for appointing Donna Detamore as a Discovery Master in a highly unusual custody case and ordering the parties to pay Detamore $10,000 to get started. Click here to read the opinion. Steve Lindamood filed for the mandamus and represents the mother in this case. The child before the court is very disabled and the child's father is totally disabled. The father's guardian is the child's paternal step-grandfather. Nancy Rommelman represents the guardian/grandfather who is seeking custody of the child. Click here to read the plea to the jurisdiction in this case which Judge Pratt denied and will likely result in another mandamus action. ... Read More >
A judge who backdates an order intentionally is a criminal
The Texas Penal Code, Sec. 37.10 states in part: Sec. 37.10. TAMPERING WITH GOVERNMENTAL RECORD. (a) A person commits an offense if he:(1) knowingly makes a false entry in, or false alteration of, a governmental record; A judge who accidentally writes in the wrong date when she signs an order lacks the mens rea to have committed this crime. However, a judge who intentionally back dates an order she signs by a few months has made a "false entry" and would have committed a Class A Misdemeanor. ... Read More >
Judges: Is Threatening Lawyers Who Support a Specific Candidate a Crime?
The Texas Penal Code, Sec. 39.03 states in part: Sec. 39.03. OFFICIAL OPPRESSION. (a) A public servant acting under color of his office or employment commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally subjects another to mistreatment or to arrest, detention, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment, or lien that he knows is unlawful; (2) intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, knowing his conduct is unlawful; or (3) intentionally subjects another to sexual harassment. (b) For purposes of this section, a public servant acts under color of his office or employment if he acts or purports to act in an official capacity or takes advantage of such actual or purported capacity. A sitting judge who tells a lawyer that he had better support Ms. XXX for the YYYth Family District Court or "you will never get any more appointments in my court" has grossly breached judicial ethics, but has probably not violated ... Read More >
Dallas Court of Appeals allows a trial judge to deny a late filed motion to recuse and then proceed with trial before the administrative judge hears the motion to recuse.
Here, after switching attorneys three times and getting two continuances, the wife’s third request for a continuance was denied. The wife’s new attorney told opposing counsel not to work over the weekend because he was going to file a motion to recuse. Trial was set for 9:00 a.m. and wife and her attorney did not appear in the courtroom, But, the wife at 9:08 a.m. filed a motion to recuse. The trial judge denied the motion and started the trial. At some point, the wife’s attorney appeared in the courtroom and he did not object to the trial going forward or ask for the evidence to be reopened for his client to present her case. The administrative judge denied the motion to recuse two days later without a hearing. The Dallas Court of Appeals acknowledged the general rule that a trial judge faced with a motion to recuse may only recuse or deny the motion and must refer the motion and get a ruling before proceeding on anything involving the case. However, an exception is carved out ... Read More >
File For a Mandamus If a Judge Refuses to Sign an Order Or Set a Hearing
The Houston First Court of Appeals granted a writ of mandamus against a trial judge who refused to set a civil case for trial in case of In re Harrell, No. 01-11-00760-CV (Tex. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 1/26/2013) (mem. op.)(orig. proc.). The Court of Appeals stated: A court of appeals may not prescribe the manner in which a trial court exercises its discretion, but it may, by mandamus, require a trial court to exercise its discretion in some manner. A trial court may not arbitrarily halt proceedings in a pending case, and mandamus will lie to compel a trial court to entertain and rule on motions pending before it. A trial court is required to consider and rule upon a motion within a reasonable time. If a motion is properly filed and pending before a trial court, the act of considering and ruling upon that motion is ministerial, and mandamus may issue to compel the trial court to act. (citations omitted). ... Read More >
A Quote to Give a Judge Who Feels Resolving a Case Quickly Is More Important Than a Fair Trial
The Supreme Court of Texas has stated: Although a goal of our system is to resolve lawsuits with "great expedition and dispatch and at the least expense," the supreme objective of the courts is "to obtain a just, fair, equitable and impartial adjudication of the rights of litigants under established principles of substantive law." This means that "convenience and economy must yield to a paramount concern for a fair and impartial trial." And basic to the right to a fair trial--indeed, basic to the very essence of the adversarial process--is that each party have the opportunity to adequately and vigorously present any material claims and defenses. Southwestern Refining Co., Inc. v. Bernal, 22 S.W.3d 425, 437 (Tex.2000)(citations omitted). ... Read More >