Category: Legal Announcement

Posted on

TJCTC Updates October 11, 2023

Good Afternoon Judges, Constables, & Court Staff,

It has been a while since we have sent out a legal update, so we have quite a few things to share. Below we discuss several hot legal topics, updated resources, new online content, and our most up-to-date legal question procedure, so make sure you scroll all the way to the bottom!

 

Hot Topics

Administrative Closure in Receivership

Many courts have received requests from a receiver to “administratively close” a receivership once a payment plan has been reached between the receiver and the debtor. There isn’t statutory authority to administratively close a receivership.

When a court receives a request like this, they may:

  • do nothing and keep the receivership as is,
  • extend the receivership,
  • sign an order limiting or changing the receiver’s powers if they no longer need them to complete their duties, or
  • end the receivership.

If a receivership is ended or expires and the debtor defaults on their payment plan, the judgment creditor can always seek the re-appointment of a receiver or utilize some other judgment enforcement tool.

TJCTC recommends that if a receivership is extended, the court keep regular check-ins as a requirement of the receiver, at least once every 180 days. These check-ins can easily be done by phone, Zoom, or email.

Often these requests come to court because the receiver is seeking payment of their fees, at least in part. Courts have the discretion to order receiver fees disbursed at any time during the receivership for work that has already been performed.

Enforcing Arbitration Awards

With the rise of virtual arbitration, courts are receiving more requests to enforce an arbitration award. We discuss the full process for handling these cases starting on page 73 of the Civil Deskbook. Please review this if you receive one of these requests.

Sometimes arbitrations are conducted by large national arbitration companies, so the packets they provide may seem strange, as they cite the Federal Arbitration Act instead of the Texas Arbitration Act. However, in the cases we have discussed with judges, they are still properly filed here, because the arbitration took place here in Texas (the parties were here when they logged onto the arbitration).

HB 3956 – DNA Samples

This bill requires law enforcement to collect DNA samples from any defendant arrested for a felony offense during the booking process. This might affect judges who magistrate, because if a defendant refuses or for some reason a sample is not collected, Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 17.47 requires this to be listed as a condition of bond for felony offenses.

 

Updated Resources

You may have already noticed, but the updated Deskbooks are being posted. Please be patient while we finish the last few updates and work diligently to update the forms, charts, checklists, and other resources.

*New* Interpreters & Spanish Terminology Self-Paced Module

We just posted a brand-new module that covers legal issues related to interpreters, including help for appointing interpreters, a Spanish/English legal glossary, and more! Judges and court staff can get 3 hours of credit for completing the module. Constables and their staff may also find this module to be a good resource when dealing with persons with limited English proficiency or language skills.

*New* Juvenile Criminal Diversions Webinar

This webinar will discuss the details of the new Juvenile Diversion procedures as well as leave time for your questions. Please join us on Monday, October 30, 2023 at 2:00 pm on Zoom. Registration will open soon, and you should receive an email.

 

Legal Question Procedure

The legal department at TJCTC is happy to assist you with your legal questions, and we want to remind you of the best procedure to get your questions answered as quickly as possible. We know in the recent past we have had some phone issues, but now that should be all cleared up!

You have two options:

  1. One of the attorneys will be answering legal questions from 9:00 am – noon and 1:30 – 3:00 pm daily when we are not traveling to or teaching at a program. You can reach them by dialing 512-347-9927 and pressing 1 when asked for an extension. Note, often you may have to leave a voicemail and wait for a call back, because we are either on another call or at a program. Please note that missed calls without voicemails will not be returned.
  2. Post your question to the legal board. Within 5 business days (often sooner) one of the attorneys will post the answer to your question.

FAQ:

Can’t I just call my favorite attorney?

No. Any legal question voicemails or calls will be forwarded to the attorney on call. This is to ensure that we have someone answering calls each week and the other attorneys can work on resources, materials, and classes for the upcoming programs.

Can I just send an email?

No. Emails with legal calls will receive a reply asking you to post on the legal board or call the legal line for the same reasons listed above.

 

Thank you so much for your time and attention!  The TJCTC team is looking forward to another great year with all of our court staff, constables, and justices of the peace. Note, these new update emails will be saved to the TJCTC Blog, The Docket, so you can access them anytime.

All the Best,

Thea & the TJCTC Team

 

Posted on

Protective Order Registry

This is a reminder of requirements that went into effect under SB 325 concerning submitting applications for Emergency Protective Orders and copies of the EPOs into the Protective Order Registry that OCA was required to establish by June 1, 2020.

Important Note: The Supreme Court has extended the date for courts to begin reporting to October 15 due to the pandemic. Here is the order: https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1449663/order-209106.pdf

The new law requires the clerk of the court to enter any application for an Emergency Protective Order and any EPO that is issued or modified into the Protective Order Registry as soon as possible but not later than 24 hours after the filing of the application or issuance of the EPO.

The clerk may delay the entry only to the extent that they lack the specific information required to be entered.

If an EPO is vacated or expires, the clerk must update the status of the Order in the Registry.

Here is a link for the clerk to log in to enter the application and EPO, as well as training on how to do this: https://www.txcourts.gov/judicial-data/protective-order-registry/authorized-user-information-instructions/

Here is the link to TOPICs (Texas Online Public Information – Courts), the OCA Protective Order Registry website as the public views it: https://topics.txcourts.gov/

And this the link to the Protective Order Registry home page: https://www.txcourts.gov/judicial-data/protective-order-registry/

These requirements are set forth in Sections 72.151 – 72.158, Government Code.

Please let us know if you have any questions. You may also wish to contact OCA if you have any technical questions about how to enter the application or EPO.

Posted on

Recent Letter Regarding Court Decision in Eviction Default Judgments

Dear Judges:

You may have received a letter from Austin attorney Russell Sloan concerning a recent decision by the 68th District Court in Dallas County holding that default money judgments (for back rent) in an eviction case following alternative service by posting and mailing the citation are unconstitutional as a violation of due process. Click here to read the letter.

A final order has not yet been entered in this case. We do not expect that to happen until approximately December 17, 2019. Once a final order is entered we would expect the district court’s decision to be appealed to the 5th Court of Appeals in Dallas. Currently, we do not believe this decision, upon entry of a final order, is legally binding on any justice courts other than potentially Precinct 4, Place 1, Dallas County.

We therefore do not believe you are legally required, at this point, to follow this decision and refuse to enter a default judgment for back rent in an eviction case where the citation was served by alternative service by posting and mailing under Rule 510.4(c) and Property Code § 24.0051(a).

We intend to closely monitor this case and any appeal and will keep you informed of any developments.

Very truly yours,
TJCTC

Posted on

2019 FEES AND COSTS CHEAT SHEET AND FAQ

Click here for Fees and Costs Cheat Sheet and FAQ

TJCTC has released its cheat sheet for the significant changes in Fees and Costs implemented by the Texas Legislature. Note that following discussions with OCA and others, we have clarified our position that the State Traffic Fine is treated as a fine and not a court cost. Also, there was a typo in some versions of the PowerPoint regarding the amount of costs on Rules of the Road parking/pedestrian offense.

Please review this information carefully, and discuss it with your court software provider, and other officials such as auditors and treasurers, as needed.

Posted on

Self-Represented Litigants Webpage

TJCTC has just launched a Self-Represented Litigant page that includes packets for the public explaining processes in justice court.

You can check out the webpage here: https://www.tjctc.org/SRL

Feel free to print out the packets and provide them to members of the public at your court.

Posted on

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS HOLDS TIME PAYMENT FEE UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Texas Court of Appeals Holds Time Payment Fee Unconstitutional

In a decision filed on February 5, 2019, the Texas Court of Appeals for the 14th Judicial District held that the time payment fee allocated to the general revenue fund (90% of the $25 collected) is facially unconstitutional.  The court held that the portion of the fee that goes to the county (10% of the $25 collected) is valid. Since this case was transferred from the 3rd Court of Appeals to the 14th Court of Appeals, all counties in the 3rd and 14th Judicial Districts would fall under the authority of this opinion. We recommend that judges in those counties immediately meet with county officials, including your county attorney and county auditor, to discuss this opinion before assessing or collecting the full time payment fee in any case.

Those counties are: Harris, Bastrop, Bell, Blanco, Burnet, Caldwell, Coke, Comal, Concho, Fayette, Hays, Irion, Lampasas, Lee, Llano, McCulloch, Milam, Mills, Runnels, San Saba, Schleicher, Sterling, Tom Green, Travis, and Williamson.

A motion for rehearing has been filed, and the state could appeal the decision to the Court of Criminal Appeals and, if so, any CCA ruling would be binding statewide. Additionally, the Legislature may decide to address the time payment fee this session. Stay tuned to the situation, and be sure to attend a TJCTC Legislative Update seminar for the latest information.

Read the opinion here.