191st Civil District Court Judge Gena Slaughter of DallasDallas Judge Sanctioned for Ex Parte Communication, Delay
"Judge [Gena] Slaughter engaged in a prohibited ex parte communication with opposing counsel that resulted in her issuing a temporary stay of a valid writ of execution," according to the public reprimand.
November 04, 2019 at 02:43 PM
3 minute read
A Dallas district judge received a public reprimand for engaging in an improper ex parte communication and neglecting to rule on a case for 15 months.
The Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct announced the public reprimand on Monday against 191st Civil District Judge Gena Slaughter, who was first elected in 2007, although she had received the sanction on Oct. 11.
The reprimand explained that the misconduct occurred in a case in which a doctor asked the court to confirm an arbitration award she had won against her former medical practice partnership. The judge held a hearing on the matter on Oct. 6, 2015, but Slaughter did not issue a final judgment until Dec. 30, 2016.
The medical practice asked the court for a new trial for various reasons, and Slaughter granted it in March 2017. However, the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas reversed her decision in October 2017.
Next, the doctor obtained a writ of execution to collect her judgment, and an officer went to the medical practice's office to execute the writ and demand payment. However, Slaughter emailed the Dallas County Constable's office, writing that she was temporarily staying execution of the writ.
"Concerns have been raised because the defendant subject to the writ is a functioning ob/gyn office with patients in the office receiving care today. Because of these concerns, I have notified Constable Boling to stop executing the writ and wait until I can confer with the attorneys for both parties," said Slaughter's email, according to the public reprimand.
The doctor's attorney stated that she didn't get any motion or pleading regarding the emergency relief, nor a phone call that opposing counsel had communicated with the court. She wrote that it appeared that the court, through an ex-parte communication, was told that the officer was interfering with patient care.
The public reprimand explained that the Texas Constitution prohibits judges from engaging in willful, persistent conduct that casts discredit on the judiciary. Texas law does the same. Texas court rules say judges must decide on cases within three months of taking them under advisement, and Texas judicial ethics canons prohibit judges from engaging in ex-parte communications.
The judicial conduct commission found that Slaughter violated the rules by failing to rule on the case for 15 months.
"The commission further concludes that Judge Slaughter engaged in a prohibited ex-parte communication with opposing counsel that resulted in her issuing a temporary stay of a valid writ of execution," according to the public reprimand.
The judge also violated ethical canons, Texas law and court rules by not filing a response when the commission notified her of the complaint against her, the commission found.
The reprimand stated, "These actions are clearly inconsistent with the proper performance of her duties as a judge and cast public discredit upon the judiciary and administration of justice."
|Read the public reprimand:
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 All
Even 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
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
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
