Texans for Lawsuit Reform

Through political action, legal, academic and market research, and grassroots initiatives, TLR fights for common-sense reforms that keep Texas open for business.

  • About TLR
    • Our Mission
    • Our Team
    • Timeline of Reforms
  • Videos
  • Issues
  • Resource Center
    • Special Reports
    • In the News
    • Press Releases
    • The Advocate
    • TLR Blog: For the Record
    • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Get Involved
  • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Stay Informed
In the News

Lawyers’ Campaign Contributions Often Don’t Get Judges Thrown Off Cases. So Why Do They Keep Coming Up?

Texas Lawyer, August 04, 2020

By Angela Morris

Lawyers’ filings that accuse Texas judges of being biased for taking campaign contributions from opposing counsel rarely succeed.

Quite the opposite: Sometimes the accusations anger the judges, who sanction or refer the accusing lawyer for attorney discipline.

So why do lawyers keep filing these arguments?

Here’s a recent example: Houston attorney Scott Newar in late July alleged that the Vinson & Elkins Political Action Committee gave large campaign contributions to four Texas Supreme Court justices this election season while Newar’s appeal was pending.

Vinson & Elkins represents Apache Corp., the opposing party to Newar’s client, Cathryn Davis, a former Apache paralegal who alleged age discrimination and retaliation by an in-house lawyer.

“These contributions create a substantial potential for bias in Apache’s favor, and undermine the public perception of and public confidence in this court’s independence and neutrality,” Newar wrote in his July 28 court filing in Davis v. Apache Corp. “Apache’s petition for review should be denied.”

The Vinson & Elkins Political Action Committee historically has been a large contributor to Supreme Court justices’ reelection campaigns, and has given $245,000 since 2017 to the nine justices’ campaigns, noted the filing.

“Texas’ ‘pay-to-play’ judicial campaign system invariably favors the rich and powerful corporations—like Apache—and their big and well-connected law firms—like V&E—at the expense of poor ‘little people’ like Cathy Davis,” Newar wrote in an email. “It deprives them of their constitutional right to neutral, impartial justice. It needs to be abolished.”

Pat Mizell, a Vinson & Elkins partner who represents Apache, declined to comment.

Vinson & Elkins Partner Harry Reasoner, who is a member of the firm’s political action committee, wrote in an email that the PAC has supported judicial election reform efforts for decades, including a current commission studying the issue now.

“As long as we have our present system, however, we will continue to contribute as we believe lawyers supporting good judges make the system healthier,” Reasoner said. “Under our Texas system, Texas Supreme Court justices must run very expensive statewide campaigns. We believe all lawyers should contribute, so judges will not have to be at the mercy of special interests for support.”

‘The reality’

Newar’s arguments will not go anywhere, according to Austin solo practitioner Lillian Hardwick, who practices judicial ethics law and frequently serves as an expert witness in judge recusal proceedings.

“There’s nothing new here,” Hardwick said.

She said that the case that is most frequently cited in these challenges in Texas is Aguilar v. Anderson, a 1993 case by El Paso’s Eighth Court of Appeals, which established that campaign contributions by themselves do not establish a reason for recusal. Another key case is the Texas Supreme Court 1995 ruling in Rogers v. Bradley, which determined that an action of a third party cannot determine the bias or prejudice of a judge, she said.

“The reality is judges are elected, and if judges are elected you’re going to have campaign contributions,” said Hardwick. “Lawyers cast the most informed votes on judges and yes, most campaign contributions come from them.”

But Newar said that he thinks a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., backs his arguments because the justices ruled a West Virginia Supreme Court justice should have recused himself because he got campaign contributions from the defendant.

Hardwick said there’s a risk to arguing about campaign contributions in court.

“The lawyers who are filing it—they need to be careful about how they characterize these things, or they may be reported to the State Bar,” said Hardwick.

She explained that Dallas attorney Lin McCraw in the past filed a motion about campaign contributions given to justices on the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas who decided his appeal. The justices were furious and reported McCraw to the State Bar of Texas.

“Stripped to essentials, McCraw seeks to exploit the very existence of an elected judiciary as a basis for recusal. Whether favored by judges or not, Texas selects its judges by popular election and requires that they finance this process,” wrote then-Chief Justice Carolyn Wright in the 2018 ruling in McCraw’s appeal. “It has done so for more than a century. Recognizing this reality, Texas courts have spoken definitively and clearly with respect to the effect of campaign contributions on recusal. The mere receipt of campaign funds, in and of itself, without an indication of communication of coordination of the handling of a case, is not a basis for recusal.”

McCraw, who has no public disciplinary history with the Texas Bar, didn’t respond to a call seeking comment before deadline.

‘I personally would not file’

Newar’s motion didn’t ask for recusal but instead urged the justices to deny Apache’s petition for review. But attorneys do often ask judges to recuse themselves because they got campaign contributions from opposing counsel or litigants.

For example, in 2019, 127th Civil District Judge R.K. Sandill of Houston refused to recuse himself just because of political contributions.

There, plaintiffs attorney Arthur S. Feldman, representing Dallas millionaire Al Hill III, alleged that two defendants—Dallas lawyers Lisa Blue and Jeff Tillotson—had given money to Sandill’s campaign shortly after they got sued.

Feldman, a Houston solo practitioner, said that his situation was different. It was a trial court judge who got the contribution, and the possibility of seeing an improperly motivated campaign contribution is more likely there than in an appellate court, he said.

The lawyers had given their money after Feldman had filed the lawsuit, and that made it look improper, the attorney said.

But the lawyers showed they had donated their money to Sandill before they knew the case would be in his court, added Feldman, who thinks that’s why he lost his motion to recuse Sandill.

Feldman said he hadn’t examined Newar’s case and couldn’t comment about it specifically. But he added that since it involved the Vinson & Elkins PAC, funded by attorneys, which frequently contributed to judges, “that’s probably the least offensive, if you ask me.”

“Nobody wants a targeted contribution made for an improper purpose. That is against the rules. The more a contribution looks like that, either because of timing, or amount, or topic, then the more a lawyer should consider filing such a motion,” Feldman said. “The more it looks like a generalized contribution—expected by a PAC that contributes always—the likelihood of success if probably zero or near zero. I’m not sure it would meet the good-faith standard on its own. … I personally would not file such a motion.”

Follow us on Facebook

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

18 hours ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

Living through a pandemic has made us keenly aware of how important delivery and service vehicles are to our daily lives. From groceries to vaccinations, commercial vehicles have been the integral piece to getting us what we need when we need it most. Unfortunately, some personal injury lawyers have set their sights on the very businesses that are getting us through this challenging time. Read and share: bit.ly/3sAJrfk ... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Forum: South Texas commercial vehicle operators, owners under attack

bit.ly

Living through a pandemic has made us keenly aware of how important delivery and service vehicles are to our daily lives. From groceries to vaccinations, commercial vehicles have been the integral pie...
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 0
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

4 days ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

In case you missed it: In addition to massive premiums, the cost of paying a lawyer to defend one of the lawsuits against owners of commercial vehicles can devastate a small company. And every dollar spent fighting an unnecessary lawsuit is one less dollar that can be invested in a company’s employees or community. Watch the Latest Video from the Keep Texas Trucking Coalition and join here: www.keeptexastrucking.com ... See MoreSee Less

Play
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 0
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

5 days ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

In case you missed it: What started as lawsuits targeting big trucks has evolved. Now any vehicle with a company logo on it is a target for lawsuits. That’s why a broad coalition of more than 500 businesses and industry groups of all sizes have banded together to stop abusive lawsuits against commercial vehicles. The future of our state depends on it. Visit www.keeptexastrucking.com to join the coalition today. ... See MoreSee Less

Play
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 0
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter

lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
13h 1384266816038440962

TLR has thousands of supporters across Texas who are committed to a fair and balanced civil justice system. Join our team today!

Get Involved - Texans for Lawsuit Reform

Texans for Lawsuit Reform has thousands of supporters from across Texas who are committed to a fair and balanced civil justice system.

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1384266816038440962Retweet on Twitter 1384266816038440962Like on Twitter 1384266816038440962Twitter 1384266816038440962
lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
15h 1384236621071929345

Fighting lawsuit abuse keeps our courts fair and our economy strong. Learn more →

About - Texans for Lawsuit Reform

TLR's objective is to restore litigation to its traditional and appropriate role in our society. A lawsuit takes a heavy emotional and financial toll ...

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1384236621071929345Retweet on Twitter 1384236621071929345Like on Twitter 13842366210719293451Twitter 1384236621071929345
lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
18h 1384194551007485954

Living through a pandemic has made us aware of how important delivery & service vehicles are to our daily lives. Unfortunately, some personal injury lawyers have set their sights on the very businesses that are getting us through it. Read & RT: #tortreform

Forum: South Texas commercial vehicle operators, owners under attack

Living through a pandemic has made us keenly aware of how important delivery and service vehicles are to our daily lives. From groceries to vaccinatio...

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1384194551007485954Retweet on Twitter 1384194551007485954Like on Twitter 1384194551007485954Twitter 1384194551007485954

Texans for Lawsuit Reform
1701 Brun Street
Houston, Texas 77019

Ph. 713-963-9363
  • About TLR
  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Timeline of Reforms
  • Videos
  • Issues
  • Resource Center
  • For the Record
  • Special Reports
  • In the News
  • Press Releases
  • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Get Involved
  • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Donate
  • Stay Informed
  • Contact TLR

Copyright © 2021 · Texans for Lawsuit Reform. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2021 · Texans for Lawsuit Reform.
All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy