What do Dallas, Galveston, Harris and other Texas county courts have that Jefferson County's doesn't? Transparency. Online transparency, that is. An easily accessible and navigable website that allows ordinary citizens to review court records of civil litigation from home, the office, cell phones, etc.
There's no blood in the water (yet), but it's only a matter of time before Dallas plaintiffs attorney Russell Budd starts screaming and flailing his arms and perhaps goes under, figuratively speaking. It won't be the jaws of a shark that devour him, but the jaws of transparency and justice – justice delayed so far.
State governments across the country are suing energy companies like ExxonMobil on the pretext that “climate change” is a proven fact rather than an hypothesis, that energy companies have contributed to it and therefore are legally responsible for any weather-related damages that occur and the cost of their remediation.
David Humphries must have no assets. Otherwise, Scott Stroud and Jennifer East might be sueing him instead of Academy Sports in Port Arthur. Two years ago, Humphries exposed himself to Stroud's and East's minor daughters inside the store and allegedly sexually assaulted both of them. But Humphries was not an Academy employee, and Stroud and East were on the premises at the time.
When he first interceded in the State of Massachusetts' lawsuit against ExxonMobil, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was motivated by the belief that “using governmental power as a means to silence critics or beat political opponents should be called out.”
When your favorite athlete or team has been eliminated from a tournament and you're not particularly fond of any of the remaining contestants, the quandary you face may not be having to decide whom to root for but whom to root against.
That's the distillation of received wisdom that gained currency after the Watergate scandal erupted and the efforts of the Nixon Administration to conceal its connection to a break-in at the Democratic National Committee were exposed, leading to impeachment hearings and culminating in Richard Nixon's resignation.
Sticky floor or sticky fingers? Would you be shocked if you went inside a movie theater and saw a movie playing? How about if you saw someone in a booth at the front of the building selling tickets? A concession stand inside with teenagers in silly outfits vending popcorn, candy, and carbonated beverages? A dimly lit or darkened room down the hall with a large screen in front of rows of cushioned seats? Would any of those things surprise you? No, of course not. Why? Because those are things you expect to see at movie theaters.
“Oh my gosh! I'd file a suit too!! Or free phones for life lol” “What the hell, file a lawsuit haha” Above are two of the comments friends of Luke Schilhab of Lake Jackson made on his Facebook page when he posted a photograph of the cell phone-shaped, second-degree burn he received on the right side of his abdomen after rolling over on the iPhone 6 he'd left lying on the bed next to him when he went to sleep one night last April.
When did some judges become comedians, albeit mediocre ones who have to laugh at their own jokes? You can almost hear these jurists chuckling at their assumed cleverness when you read their opinions and come across another witless witticism, often a lame pun on a litigant's name or marketing slogans. Here's a recent example: FedEx moved to dismiss a patent infringement case against it on the grounds that the Eastern District of Texas is not a convenient forum for it. Does the judge approve the motion based on the obvious merits and recent high court decisions? No, he snarkily denies it and tries to conceal the wrong thinking with a limp joke on the company's slogan.
Three years ago, while affirming an appeals court decision overturning a multimillion-dollar judgment against Georgia Pacific in a mesothelioma case, the Texas State Supreme Court made the following assertions: that “proof of ‘any exposure’ to a defendant’s product will not suffice” to establish liability, that “the dose must be quantified,” and that “the plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s product was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff’s disease.”