Records show disparity in how often civil judges are available to assist presiding court

SAN ANTONIO – A months-long probe via Investigates discovered a large disparity in how often Bexar County civil district court judges are available to assist the presiding court.

The data elevate questions on whether or not some judges were compelled to tackle further workload in a court gadget designed to farm out hearings every morning.

Court standing sheets masking mid-January throughout the finish of July — 133 days that the courts had been in consultation — show that a number of judges had been indexed as available to assist in presiding simply over 70% of the time.

A supply supplied the data to at the situation of anonymity after the Office of Civil District Courts Administration denied a an identical public data request from past due this summer time.

In written statements, a couple of judges driven again on ’s reporting and praised the presiding gadget, claiming that the standing sheets are no longer an in depth file of judicial attendance or effort and that they don’t account for the judges’ different paintings tasks.

Conversely, one of the vital 14 civil district court judges advised in a written commentary the county’s presiding gadget is “very inefficient” and “frustrating” and steered that it “should be significantly modified or done away with completely.”

‘Spinning the wheel of fortune’

San Antonio legal professional Leslie Sachanowicz urged the county on regulatory and statutory interpretations whilst operating for the civil segment of the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office for a decade and a part.

He now represents shoppers in civil disputes, telling in an interview out of doors the presiding court, “So, I’ve actually grown up in this courthouse.”

“I call it spinning the wheel of fortune because you don’t know which judge you’re going to get,” Sachanowicz mentioned, describing the county’s distinctive gadget for dealing with civil instances.

Instead of a divorce, lawsuit or another civil subject being assigned to a unmarried court when it’s filed and staying with that court during the case, plaintiffs, defendants, and legal professionals meet on the presiding court, both in individual or by the use of Zoom video on massive displays positioned all over the court.

The pass judgement on overseeing the presiding court calls out the motive quantity after which farms out the case to one of the vital different civil district courts all over the courthouse advanced, in line with which pass judgement on is recently available and how lengthy the listening to may take.

Some instances could have long gone in entrance of a couple of civil judges by the point they are resolved.

Some hearings happen in individual, and a few happen by the use of Zoom.

The county’s civil district judges take turns overseeing the presiding court, often for a number of weeks at a time, data show.

The presiding pass judgement on too can pay attention a number of issues in the presiding court itself on the finish of the docket name. That used to be the case when noticed the presiding court in individual previous this yr.

Officials declined to permit the presiding court court cases to be recorded via a digicam.

Parties in civil dispute can request that their case be designated as “complex.” If this request is granted via a pass judgement on, it’s assigned to one pass judgement on during it.

“There really is no most appropriate way. I’ll just be candid with you. Every system you have, people are going to be critical of,” Sachanowicz mentioned.

What the court standing sheets show

The day-to-day court standing sheets show the presiding pass judgement on on the best and come with a listing of which judges are available in conjunction with their respective Zoom assembly IDs, what hours they are open to assist presiding in addition to any instances already assigned to them for the day.

On maximum days, no less than one visiting pass judgement on used to be indexed at the sheet to supply non permanent help to the presiding court.

From mid-January throughout the finish of July, the data indexed Judge Toni Arteaga and Judge David Canales as available to assist presiding 71% of the time.

Judge Mary Lou Alvarez had an availability charge of 74%, the data show.

Nine of the 14 judges had an availability charge of between 83% and 88%. In this crew, Judge Monique Diaz’s availability charge of 85% used to be calculated beginning at the date she returned from maternity depart in early March.

Judges Nadine Nieto and Christine Hortick, every in their first yr of elected administrative center, had availability charges of 91% and 98%, respectively.

Judge Nieto and Judge Hortick had been the one two judges to permit to file photos within their courtrooms for this tale.

Though there are no native regulations for how many days a pass judgement on is needed to be available, even judges keeping trials in their court docket are intended to assist the presiding court from 8:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.

Additionally, Ryan Anderson, common suggest for the Bexar County Civil District Courts, advised that every pass judgement on has dedicated to helping the presiding court for no less than an hour every morning.

Anderson declined to be interviewed on digicam for this tale however replied a spread of questions off-camera concerning the presiding court gadget.

After public file request blocked, received data thru supply

On Aug. 2, Investigates asked court standing sheets for every county industry day between January 1 and July 31.

In an Aug. 16 letter, Anderson knowledgeable that administrative data held via courts and judicial department companies are no longer coated via the Texas Public Information Act, that means they are no longer required via legislation to be grew to become over in reaction to public data requests.

In a proper rejection letter despatched via Anderson on Aug. 23, he knowledgeable that the data had been exempt from being launched.

Pressed via weeks later concerning the request being denied, Anderson conceded {that a} considerable majority of the judges voted on a plan of action that integrated no longer freeing the standing sheets to .

Anderson advised the dialogue used to be extra substantive than just a straight-up vote from judges on whether or not to free up the sheets.

Several days in March confirmed as few as 5 judges, together with visiting judges, at the presiding standing sheets.

Anderson attributed the small listing to a discounted caseload heard via the presiding court throughout spring spoil.

On a couple of days this summer time, best between 8-10 judges — together with visiting judges — had been indexed at the sheets, the data show.

What the judges advised

Investigates despatched all 14 civil district court judges requests for interviews for this tale.

None agreed to sit down down with for an interview.

Judge Canales supplied with an in depth written reaction referring to his 71% availability charge.

“While status sheets offer a glimpse, they do not always provide a full picture of the duties and challenges inherent in my role as a district judge,” Judge Canales wrote.

He supplied the next breakdown of why he used to be no longer indexed at the sheets on sure days:

• Missed six days at other occasions as a result of sickness

• 14 days getting ready for and attending proceeding felony training seminars

• Two days satisfying tasks to forums, committees and workgroups, together with chairing the Bexar County Juvenile Board

• Six days overseeing Bexar County Esteem, Achievement, Grit, Learning & Leadership, Empowerment, and Strength Court, the county’s court for teenage boys in foster care

• 10 days of private and holiday time

Judge Canales’ 38 general absences fit the determine calculated for him.

After attaining out to Judge Arteaga for an interview, won a message again that she used to be out of the administrative center.

After adopted up days later, Judge Arteaga replied by the use of e mail that she have been away due to a demise in her circle of relatives.

“I understand you will be (sic) Presiding Court next week. I would be happy to schedule time for an interview if you have any additional questions about the process,” Judge Arteaga wrote on Oct. 6.

Judge Arteaga didn’t reply to a 2nd follow-up e mail from asking what day and time she can be available for an interview.

‘It is not… an accurate record of judicial attendance or effort’

Judge Rosie Alvarado, native administrative pass judgement on for the Bexar County civil district courts, supplied with probably the most detailed reaction on judicial attendance and the court standing sheets.

“The centralized Presiding Court docketing system is a point of pride for the overwhelming majority of our local judiciary. During the many decades since its inception, it has proven efficient and capable of providing litigants quick access to our courts,” wrote Judge Alvarado, who, in conjunction with Judge Angélica Jiménez, presides over the Preparation, Esteem, Achievement, Resiliency, Learning, Strength & Stamina restorative care court.

Both judges had 83% availability to assist with the presiding court, in accordance to the standing sheets.

Judge Alvarado, in her written reaction, driven again on analyzing court standing sheets to analyze pass judgement on availability.

“Please understand that our Court Status sheet is an internal tool used to assist the Presiding Judge. It is just one means of sharing information with him or her. It is not a time sheet. Nor is it an accurate record of judicial attendance or effort. More importantly, it is a fluid and ever-changing document. It is a rare day on which the initial sheet is not revised multiple times before the day’s docket is wrapped up. Additionally, each judge reports his or her status as they see fit. It is not standardized,” Judge Alvarado wrote.

Many of the sheets received via integrated handwritten notes and revisions.

Judge Alvarado additionally advised in her written reaction that the sheets don’t account for the judges’ different judicial duties, “which only grow as a judge becomes more established.”

“It is usually the more experienced judges who are tasked with overseeing court programming, operations, providing legislative advocacy for the judiciary, or the administrative work required to run the judiciary. These are all vital judicial functions, but they are not necessarily reflected on the Court Status sheets,” Judge Alvarado wrote.

Judge Jimenez and Judge Marisa Flores, each with 86% availability, didn’t reply to a couple of emails from searching for an interview for this tale.

All of the underneath judges and neatly as Judge Diaz steered as an alternative touch Anderson about our inquiries.

• Judges Nieto, Alvarez, Tina Torres (83% availability)

• Judge Laura Salinas (84% availability)

• Judge Norma Gonzales (88% availability)

• Judge Cynthia Chapa (87% availability)

Judge Nicole Garza, who had 83% availability in accordance to the standing sheets, advised {that a} long sickness contributed to her absences.

The standing sheets didn’t listing Judge Garza as being available 22 occasions between mid-January and the tip of July.

“Thankfully, I am slowly but consistently improving, but it has been a painful and frustrating road. My opinion of presiding reflects my experience with the above issue. More specifically, had my sisters and brother ‘in-the-law’ not agreed to help cover those days where I was in debilitating pain, my individual docket may have suffered. Better or worse, we pull together and are one of the few counties where a hearing can be obtained as quickly as it can here. I practiced in several other counties before I came to be on the bench and know this to be true,” Judge Garza wrote on Oct. 11.

‘System should be significantly modified or done away with completely’

Judge Hortick, alternatively, used to be pointed in her complaint of the presiding gadget.

After declining a request for an interview, Judge Hortick advised in an Oct. 6 e mail, “I’m very proud of the work I do at the courthouse. When I campaigned, I promised I would work hard for Bexar County. I’m doing my best to honor that commitment. The Presiding system, as it currently exists, works well for short hearings but can be very inefficient, frustrating, and costly for parties seeking to be heard on longer matters. In my opinion, the current Presiding system should be significantly modified or done away with completely.”

Asked in a follow-up e mail from what would in all probability substitute the presiding gadget, Judge Hortick replied:

“The simplest, cleanest way would be for each court to maintain their own dockets as do our local criminal courts and most other jurisdictions. The other way it could work is if we had some sort of hybrid system in which we kept Presiding to assist for the first hour to handle quick matters, and then each of us maintain our own dockets. This would provide for more efficient scheduling but would not address the issue of the lack of consistency in cases. Lack of consistency in cases is one of the biggest problems I have with the Presiding system. Litigants show up for a hearing and have no idea which of the 14 judges they will get that day. Each judge has their own level of experience and temperament. If litigants had one judge, they would not have to rehash the same facts over and over with each new judge. That is very inefficient and, depending on the situation, causes those individuals to relive their drama each and every time they come to court because it’s a different judge, and they need to be brought up to speed. That’s why in childrens’ court, cases are assigned to the same judge. That judge knows the case from start to finish. It puts the best position to keep the case moving along and keep all the players honest. I’ve had a few attorneys try and pull a fast one because I didn’t have certain information because I was not one who heard the case previously.”

Anderson, in an Oct. 5 e mail, advised that previous critiques from the Texas Office of Court Administration have persistently proven that Bexar County’s presiding gadget is way more environment friendly at resolving instances than unmarried court docket techniques used in different counties like Harris and Tarrant.

Like most of the judges, Anderson driven again on using the court standing sheets to calculate pass judgement on availability.

Anderson mentioned the odds calculated via didn’t fit his personal observations on the courthouse.

“Additionally, the revisions regarding a particular judge’s availability do not always make it onto the sheet. Oftentimes, the Presiding Court judge simply makes a handwritten note or commits the change to memory upon receipt of information as to another judge’s availability. In short, the status sheet for each day is a living, changing document that is meant to be used to assist the Presiding Judge and supporting elements (court reporters, bailiffs and clerks) in resolving the cases set for hearing each day,” Anderson wrote.

‘There’s a legislative resolution to this’

“The only people that can hold the judges accountable are their bosses or supervisors. Those bosses or supervisors are the electorate,” mentioned Sachanowicz.

Sachanowicz pointed to the state of Florida, which uses retention elections for a few of its judges.

The state’s perfect court justices and appeals court judges are appointed via the governor. Voters then vote “yes” or “no” on whether or not to stay them in administrative center in a procedure referred to as a advantage retention election.

“There’s a legislative solution to this,” mentioned Sachanowicz.