An appellate court in Houston on Tuesday allowed a claim to proceed by a former court administrator, who alleged that Galveston County had "bugged" attorney-client meeting rooms at the local jail.

Rejecting the county's argument that jail recordings do not violate the law, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals ruled that plaintiff Bonnie Quiroga had a valid claim under the Texas Whistleblowers Act when she alleged that County Judge Mark Henry fired her for reporting on the jail recordings.

Quiroga's lawsuit said the conduct violated a Texas law requiring judges to ensure appointed criminal-defense lawyers ethically perform their duties to clients. The opinion noted lawyers have an ethical duty to maintain confidentiality with their clients.

"Installation of listening devices in the county jail in areas where attorneys are to speak confidentially with their clients could be considered a violation of the judges' duty to ensure that appointed attorneys meet their ethical obligations to their clients," said the opinion by Justice Jerry Zimmerer, joined by Justices Ken Wise and Charles Spain. "It was reasonable for Quiroga to believe in her experience that such installation of the recording devices violated the law."

Quiroga worked for Galveston County for 30 years and was director of justice administration for the past 14 years, Texas Lawyer reported. But in July 2014, Henry "summarily fired" Quiroga, who reported the alleged bugged jail.

The county vehemently denies that it was recording attorney-client meetings in the jail, noted the defendants' attorney, David Minces, owner of Minces PLLC in Bellaire.

"I think, ultimately, the county will win that claim at trial," said Minces, noting it's Quiroga's only claim to survive to trial. "The county is in a much better position than they were beforehand."

Although the Fourteenth Court allowed her jail-recordings claim to survive, it dismissed other claims in Quiroga's lawsuit. For example, she had also alleged that another county employee illegally revealed one vendor's bid to a competing vender, allowing that second vendor to undercut the first bid. Those actions amounted to the crime of misuse of official information, Quiroga had alleged.

That whistleblower claim failed because Quiroga didn't correctly report that allegation, the court ruled. The county argued she had reported it to a county judge, Henry, but should have instead taken the information to a person who was authorized to enforce the law or to investigate and prosecute a crime. It was unreasonable for Quiroga to think Henry was the proper person, said the opinion.

Another claim the court dismissed alleged that Henry and the Galveston County Commissioner's court had acted outside their authority when firing Quiroga.

The plaintiff had argued that only the area's trial judges had authorization to fire her. She had sought damages, but the Fourteenth Court ruled that the county would have immunity to the damages claim. Quiroga might still be able to pursue the claim against the individual defendants, but that question was not included in the appeal, noted the opinion.

In separate litigation in the past, Henry v. Cox, a district judge in Galveston County sued Henry over Quiroga's filing. That case went to the Texas Supreme Court, which ruled in 2017 that a trial court couldn't order Henry to reinstate Quiroga at a specific salary, and that district judges would have authority to determine if the salary was reasonable.

Quiroga's attorney, Galveston solo practitioner Mark Stevens, said he's surprised that the Fourteenth Court opinion didn't mention Henry v. Cox.

"I'm concerned this opinion may embolden some commissioners courts who arbitrarily dismiss or otherwise—in an administrative way—mistreat judicial employees," said Stevens. "If that's the case, then the commissioners court would have a power over the judiciary, which they've never had before—and cannot have—under the Constitution's separation-of-powers provision."

|

Read the ruling:

|

Related stories: