Houston judge should not have received public reprimand, special review court says
A Houston judge who was issued a public reprimand for failing to timely rule on motions has been exonerated. (Image from Shutterstock)
A Houston judge who was issued a public reprimand for failing to timely rule on motions has been exonerated.
In a Dec. 13 opinion, a three-judge special review court appointed by the Texas Supreme Court found that the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct did not properly rely on the evidence when it issued the public reprimand to Judge Ursula Hall of the 165th District Court in Harris County, Texas.
“Judge Hall has more than 3,000 cases on her docket and conducts approximately 40 trials per year,” the special review court said in the opinion. “No evidence was presented showing the quantity or complexity of the business of the 165th District Court and whether, in light of the complexity of the docket, Judge Hall has failed to timely execute the business of the court.”
The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct issued the public reprimand April 15, after complaints were filed against Hall by Chief Justice Tracy Christopher of the Texas 14th Court of Appeals and two lawyers who appeared before her. Christopher noted that lawyers repeatedly filed petitions for writs of mandamus after Hall failed to timely rule on motions.
The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct found that Hall failed “to perform her judicial duties in a timely manner with respect to setting, hearing, deciding and signing orders in cases filed in her court.” It also concluded that Hall’s “failure in these respects constituted willful and persistent conduct that is clearly inconsistent with the proper performance of her duties.”
The special review court, however, said the commission did not cite specific time frames or standards that Hall violated. It also found that she often worked 12 hours per day, six days per week.
“She assumes a ‘thoughtful’ approach to the issues before her and seeks to give each litigant an ‘open and fair forum,’ which requires her to listen, read and research each issue carefully; Judge Hall’s approach requires that she expend time on each matter before her, rather than adopting a more efficient ‘rule and run’ approach to managing motions,” the special review court said.
The special review court added that evidence shows that Hall cleared 100% or more of her docket during much of the time that she served on the 165th District Court.
“I’m grateful for the opinion from the special court of review,” Hall said in a statement published by Law.com. “I strive every day to handle the thousands of cases that are assigned to my courtroom with diligence and attention to detail, ensuring that each case is handled in accordance with the law.”
Hall—who was initially issued a public warning by the commission in October 2020—lost her bid for reelection in November. Her term ended Tuesday.
