Houston Lawyers Create Facebook Page to Gripe About Clerk's Office
In his first post on the new page, lawyer Scott Rothenberg wrote, “So you think you can stop attorneys from posting about the HCDC? Guess again!”
June 10, 2019 at 10:22 AM
4 minute read
|
An angry mob of Simpsons townspeople, marching through the streets with flaming torches in hand, adorns the cover of a new lawyer-created Facebook group about the Harris County District Clerk's Office.
The group, called “HCDC—We're Not Going to Take It!,” sprang up overnight and gathered more than 200 members during a brief time from Thursday evening to Friday morning. Houston attorney Scott Rothenberg created the group because around 5 p.m. on Thursday, an administrator of the clerk's office official page for lawyers, “Harris County District Clerk's Legal Community Connection,” started prohibiting attorneys from writing new entries and commenting on existing posts. The change was short-lived, though. As of Friday morning, the settings were back to normal.
Previously, attorneys were posting to the Legal Community Connection page about concerns and complaints about the office's operations, centered around delayed citations, e-filing rejections, bills for clients' past-due costs and fees, and other odd-ball clerk errors.
Legal Community Connection was a valuable resource for lawyers to post their concerns and get the clerk's office to resolve problems, said Rothenberg. He disagreed with the page turning off posting and commenting.
“I thought that's really unfortunate because it's going to diminish communication,” Rothenberg said. “I thought, 'We're not going to take it'—and that's where the page came from.”
In his first post on the new page, Rothenberg wrote, “So you think you can stop attorneys from posting about the HCDC? Guess again!”
But Harris County Chief Deputy Clerk Judith Snively said it was a mistake to turn off Legal Community Connection's comments.
It grew difficult for multiple clerk's office employees to monitor and respond to comments on the Legal Community Connection group. During a meeting, Snively said staffers agreed that it would streamline the process if attorneys called or emailed clerks directly for help, rather than going through Facebook. The office posted a listing of office contacts for lawyers to call.
Snively said a communications staffer misunderstood and thought she was supposed to turn off commenting on Legal Community Connection, and made the changes to the settings. Harris County District Clerk Marilyn Burgess learned about the changes late last night, Snively said.
“She did not authorize that change,” Snively said. “This morning, she came in and said, 'Put it back just the way that it was.'”
The changes to the Legal Connection Community page started around 4:45 p.m. on Thursday, said Emily Hull, a family law attorney at the Haston Law Firm in Houston, who was on Facebook and started seeing notifications about the changes.
An administrator changed the group's settings from a “closed group,” which means people can search for it but need an invitation from a current member to join, to a “secret group,” which means it doesn't come up in search results. Another settings change required new posts to obtain an administrator's approval prior to publication.
The group's “about” page was also edited to delete a sentence that said the office welcomed questions and feedback from members.
Also, someone turned off the ability to comment on existing posts.
Hull, who helped Rothenberg create the “We're Not Going to Take It!” page, said attorneys generally get “testy” about free speech issues because they know the law says government officials are allowed to place certain time, place and manner restrictions on speech, but they can't target the content of speech.
“She didn't like the content of the speech,” Hull said about the clerk. “She's regulating content. That's the problem.”
Related story:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEven With New Business Courts, Texas Is a Long Way from Taking Delaware's Corporate Law Mantle
5 minute read'Courts Do Get It Wrong': Legal Experts Discuss State-Law Certification Pros and Cons
9 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'America's Next Top Model' Contestant Says Ye Assaulted Her
- 2LexisNexis Responds to Canadian Professor’s Criticism of Lexis+ AI
- 3'Everything Leaves a Digital Footprint': How to Navigate the Complexities of Internal Investigations
- 4Baker McKenzie Accepts Defeat on Australian Integration With Firm's Asia Practice
- 5PepsiCo's Legal Team Champions Diversity, Wellness, and Mentorship to Shape a Thriving Corporate Culture
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250