Law Offices Of Greg Enos

Galveston divorce lawyer | Galveston divorce attorney | Child custody lawyers Galveston

281-333-3030

Divorce and Child Custody

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • PAYMENT
  • About
    • Greg B. Enos
    • Paul Enos
    • Shandon Tonry
    • Contact Us
    • Map
    • Galveston Divorce Attorneys
  • Divorce
    • Uncontested Divorce
    • Divorce Process
    • Divorce FAQS
    • Divorce for Business Owners
    • Divorce for Physicians and Dentists
    • Property Division
    • The Family House
    • Taxes & Divorce
    • Alimony
    • Adultery
  • Custody
    • Child Custody Questions
    • Child Support
    • Custody Evaluation
    • International / Interstate Custody Disputes
    • When a Child Can Choose?
  • Mongoose
  • Blogs
  • Links
    • Links
    • Contact Us
    • Map
    • The Mongoose
    • School Districts
    • Galveston Co. Courts
    • Harris Co. Courts
  • Videos

Jan 14

New “Mongoose” Newsletter Exposes Judge Pratt’s “New Year’s Eve Massacre”

The January 12, 2014 edition of the “Mongoose” newsletter discussed the illegal and horribly unwise dismissal of 661 cases by Judge Denise Pratt on December 30 just to make her court’s statistics look better.  Click here to read the newsletter.

Here is one story from this newsletter:

Pratt’s “New Year’s Eve Massacre” Dismisses Hundreds of Cases


Here is one example of what Judge Pratt did to hundreds of cases on December 30.  Cause number 2012-06882 is a post-divorce suit to address undivided property pending in the 311th since February 2, 2012.  The case has been set for trial seven times and six times it was continued by Judge Pratt.  On December 2, 2013, Judge Pratt continued the trial until January 27, 2014 and told the attorneys that the case had to go to trial in January or she would dismiss it.  On December 30, 2013, along with hundreds of other cases, this lawsuit was dismissed by Judge Pratt without notice or hearing.  The attorneys received notification that the case was dismissed for “want of prosecution.”  The signed order dismissing the case is not imaged and no one has seen it.  Is the order stuck in a backlog in imaging or is it in a folder under a Whataburger bag on the front seat of Pratt’s new car?  Does the order even exist?  Now, this petitioner must spend hundreds of dollars for her attorney to get the case reinstated back on Pratt’s overcrowded docket.

Apparently, Judge Pratt was concerned that her court has more cases pending for more than a year than any other district court, so she decided to make her statistics look better by dismissing 662 cases that were over a year old.  All of the dismissals are dated December 30, 2013.  December 31 is the date used for courts’ statistical reports.

Rule 165a states that the court must send notice of its intent to dismiss and the date and place of the dismissal hearing to the parties or attorneys.  The rule describes a dismissal hearing.  Pratt followed none of these procedures when she dismissed the hundreds of cases on December 30.

All attorneys have at some time received DWOP (Dismissal for Want of Prosecution) notices during our careers that told  us to appear on a specific date and time and explain why our old cases should not be dismissed.  We all know to file a motion to retain and appear at the hearing to keep our cases from being dismissed.

Pratt herself has presided over many DWOP dockets as a judge and she attended them when she was a Greensheet lawyer, so she should have known exactly how this all works.

On December 30, when Pratt sat alone in her chambers signing hundreds of dismissal orders, surely she wondered why her courtroom was not full of attorneys at a DWOP docket.  Or, did she even sign orders?  Did Pratt just put check marks on a printout of old cases and tell her coordinator to input in the system that the cases were dismissed and send out dismissal notices?  Did Pratt not realize that some of the cases she was dismissing had been settled and the final orders were sitting on her desk waiting for her to simply sign them?

Did Pratt consider what she was doing to the hundreds of families and children effected by these dismissals?  Many of these dismissed cases had temporary orders made by Pratt keeping a parent away from a child or limiting visitation or requiring very specific behaviors because Pratt thought it essential to protect the child.  Did Pratt not understand that dismissing those cases meant that her temporary orders went away, leaving the children unprotected by court order?

Does Pratt care or understand what financial and emotional toll her dismissals would impose on hundreds of parents?  Why should hundreds of litigants have to be charged by their lawyers to draft and file motions to reinstate and attend hearings to get their cases back on the docket?  The worry and frustration and bewilderment Pratt has caused for so many Harris County citizens is staggering.

Even the attorneys who make a living off unnecessary amicus appointments and the high dollar big shots who are awarded such big fees by Pratt now wonder what the hell she was doing on December 30, because their cases got tossed as well.

Pratt’s fellow Republican judges who face opponents in November cannot believe she would deliver the Democrats yet another excuse to trash all Republican judges and accuse them all of being as ignorant and uncaring as Pratt.

Here is what is being done in response to this latest Pratt disaster: 

    1. Vote in the HBA Judicial Preference Poll that is going on right now.
    2. Attorneys are filing individual complaints with the Commission on Judicial Conduct for each case dismissed on December 30.  Let’s see if they can ignore a few hundred complaints!.  

 

    1. A public demonstration is being planned for Pratt’s court to demand a truthful explanation for her New Year’s Eve Massacre and to request that all of the cases be reinstated without any motions from the innocent parties she tossed out of court.  We will also demand to see copies of the orders Pratt supposedly signed on December 30 dismissing the cases.

 

    1. Attorneys are getting the word out to Republican activists and voters about this disgraceful judicial behavior.

 

  1. Family law attorneys need to get behind one of the Republican candidates so that Pratt loses in the March 2014 GOP primary.  Even if you hope that Democrat Sherri Cothrun eventually wins in November, we need to actually donate money to Ms. Franklin, or Mr. Magdaleno or Ms. Detamore (Phil Placzek is not actively campaigning for the 311th, even though his name remains on the ballot),

Category:Judge Denise Pratt, Judge Problems | Tags: Judge Denise Pratt

Recent Posts

  • Who Moves Out of the House During Divorce?
  • How to Prepare for Your First Divorce Mediation Session
  • Donors Hold Off on Donation Until Beto O’Rourke Decides to Run
  • Laudanum
  • Election 2018

Categories

  • Agreement Incident to Divorce
  • Alcoholism and Drug Addiction
  • Amicus Attorneys
  • Attorney Disqualification
  • Attorney's Fees
  • BAKER STREET BAZAAR
  • Book Review
  • Business Valuation
  • Characterization
  • Child Custody
  • Child Support
  • Community Property
  • Constitutional Rights
  • Court Appointment Abuse
  • Crimes in the courtroom
  • Criminal law and family law
  • Default
  • Discovery
  • Dismissal summary judgment
  • Divorce
  • Domestic Violence
  • Doug York
  • E-Filing
  • E-Filing and Service
  • Election 2018
  • Electronic Evidence
  • Enforcement
  • Enos Legal Directories
  • Evidence
  • First Divorce
  • Galveston County
  • Gary Polland
  • Good Judges
  • Grandparents' custody and visitation
  • Harris County
  • Hearsay
  • Illegal Evidence
  • Injunctions
  • Injury Settlements in Divorce
  • Intervention
  • Judge Alicia Franklin
  • Judge Denise Pratt
  • Judge Problems
  • Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc
  • Julia Maldonado
  • Jury Trial
  • Law firm billing
  • Local Legal News
  • Mandamus
  • Modification
  • Mongoose Blog
  • Orders entry nunc pro tunc
  • Pleadings
  • Poetry and Prose
  • Politics and elections
  • Possession and visitation
  • Property Division
  • Recusal
  • Reimbursement
  • Religion and Philosophy
  • Rules of Civil Procedure
  • Separate Property
  • Spousal Maintenance (Alimony)
  • Ted Cruz
  • Temporary Orders
  • Tracing Separate Property
  • Trial
  • trial by consent
  • TRUMP REALITY
  • Uncategorized
  • Undivided Assets
  • US Supreme Court
  • Useful forms
  • Valuation
  • Venue and Transfer
  • Visitation and Possession
  • Waste / Fraud
  • Witnesses

Archives

  • April 2022
  • April 2019
  • November 2018
  • October 2017
  • June 2017
  • April 2017
  • January 2017
  • February 2016
  • March 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • September 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • February 2013
    • Home
    • Blog
    • Contact Us
    • Map
    • Site Map
    facebook twitter

    17207 Feather Craft Lane, Webster, Texas 77598

    © 2013 The Enos Law Firm, PC. All rights Reserved.

    Popup Content