Meet Vince Santini and Eric Yollick, Republicans Running for Judge of Montgomery County's 457th District Court
Vince Santini and Eric Yollick are competing for the 457th District Court of Montgomery County in the Republican Primary runoff election. Whoever wins faces Democrat Marc M. Meyer in November.
June 22, 2020 at 08:06 PM
9 minute read
In the Republican runoff for Montgomery County's 457th District Court, Vince Santini argues he's more qualified because of his hunger to serve the community, his experience handling large dockets and his better temperament than opponent Eric Yollick.
Whoever wins the Republican runoff for the newly created district court will compete against Democratic candidate Marc M. Meyer in the November election.
"Temperament is crucial because the courtroom is a place where everyone should be treated fairly and laws applied fairly. It is not a place for games, grudges, tomfoolery, nor tyrants," Santini wrote. "Most of my career has been spent in the spotlight, and I have demonstrated the level of integrity needed for this bench. On the contrary, since February 2020, my opponent has demonstrated he does not contain the requisite temperament."
Yollick has pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor Class C criminal mischief for throwing an egg at a Montgomery County official's vehicle, as a protest against a COVID-19 stay-home order. He's said he cleaned the egg immediately and it wasn't a crime because it didn't cause damage. Yollick in the past faced a civil court judgment for fraud and punitive damages.
Read more: This Texan Running for Judge Egged a County Official's SUV. Now Lawyers Want Him Out of the Race
Texas Lawyer is publishing Q&As with judicial candidates in primary runoff elections. Early voting runs from June 29 to July 10, and election day is July 14.
Despite many requests, Yollick did not complete Texas Lawyer's questionnaire.
Here is the Q&A for Santini.
|
Vince Santini
What is a brief biography of work experience, educational qualifications and career honors that you want voters to know about?
In December 2005, I earned my bachelor of science in sociology with a minor in psychology from the University of Houston, graduated summa cum laude, and was top of my class. In May 2009, I earned my doctor of jurisprudence from South Texas College of Law, where I was the number one ranked trial advocate. I earned many distinguished trial advocacy awards, including: Dean Gerald Treece's Student Advocacy Service Award and Order of the Barristers Legal Honor Society for law students who excelled as trial advocates having represented Texas in the most prestigious trial competitions around the nation, while receiving best advocate awards and trial champion. I also coached other law students on trial advocacy and the rules of evidence.
In October 2009, I was hired by the Montgomery County District Attorney's Office and immediately began trying cases. In my nine years serving Montgomery County, I participated in approximately 75 trials, including: capital murder, murder, intoxication manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, injury to a child causing death or serious bodily injury, aggravated assault and aggravated robbery. I am most proud of my days as a special victims unit prosecutor where I prosecuted sexual crimes against children under the age of 10. In 2015, I was awarded child abuse prosecutor of the year. I was published in the area of crimes against children, and was an instructor at the largest international crimes against children conference. I participated in every single aspect of trial, including arguing motions, evidentiary hearings, jury charge hearings, voir dire, witness examinations, opening and closing arguments, as well as sentencing. Brett Ligon honored me with D.A. Awards in Prosecution on eight separate occasions.
My experience is not limited to criminal law. In July 2018, I started working as a senior civil litigation attorney at a plaintiff's firm in The Woodlands. I primarily handle cases involving breach of contract, breach of the common law duty of good faith and fair dealing, violations of consumer protection laws, and violations of the insurance code. I handle all aspects of litigation including, pre-suit demands, petitions, discovery (written and depositions), motions and pretrial and trial. I am admitted to practice civil law in every federal district court in Texas.
Why do you want this position?
I am seeking this bench to serve, protect citizens' rights, and see justice is done. Today we see a lack of respect for the sanctity of life, a lack of respect for law and order, and a lack of respect for our country. We see injustice and need someone to stand firm against the currents of unconstitutionality. I see this as a vocation to serve Montgomery County. I was asked to run for this bench by several people in our community who have actually witnessed my ability to uphold and enforce our laws while seeking justice. Through prayer and counsel from my wife, I am answering the call.
How are you different or better suited for the bench than your opponent?
Service. Experience. Temperament. These are the three attributes that set me apart from my opponent.
First, service: I am seeking this bench to serve our great community. This bench belongs to the people of the great state of Texas and Montgomery County, and I have spent my entire career, both professionally and privately serving them. In my career I have taken an extra oath to seek justice. As an assistant district attorney in Montgomery County for about a decade, I have made decisions that affect our entire community, decisions I never took lightly nor made without proper reflection and preparation. In my private life, I serve on the executive board for Montgomery County's Children's Advocacy Center, Children's Safe Harbor, where I help raise awareness and raise money to help child victims of physical and sexual abuse. I also volunteer at my church, St. Matthias in Magnolia, where I help teach youth classes, marriage classes, and lector. It is my hunger to serve that was the reason other lawyers in the community asked me to run for this bench.
Second, is experience. I have the right experience to be judge in a district court. The 457th District Court was created for one reason: docket management. I am the only candidate that has any district court docket management experience. As district court chief for both the 435th and 359th District Courts in Montgomery County, I was in charge of every case on the docket–upwards of 1,200 per year. The numbers show that month after month, we disposed of more cases than came in, effectively and efficiently reducing the docket size. I have worked in 16 out of 17 elected courts in Montgomery County in both civil and criminal law. I am a trial specialist that has tried the most important cases affecting Montgomery County, including capital murder, murder and sexual assault of children, and I tried these cases at the highest burden of proof with unanimous jury verdicts. As a senior civil litigator, I handle similar issues that will face the 457th, including discovery disputes and motions practice. I have handled civil law cases all over Texas in both state and federal courts. I am administered to practice civil law in every state court in Texas, as well as every federal district court in Texas, along with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. To achieve this, shows I have the requisite qualifications and am in good standing with the State Bar of Texas.
Which leads me to the last most important distinction between myself and my opponent, that being temperament. Judicial candidates are treated the same as judges while they are campaigning, and according to the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, judges are held to higher standards, as they should be. Even what the candidates do during extrajudicial activities affects what they do on the bench. Temperament is crucial because the courtroom is a place where everyone should be treated fairly and laws applied fairly. It is not a place for games, grudges, tomfoolery, nor tyrants. Most of my career has been spent in the spotlight, and I have demonstrated the level of integrity needed for this bench. On the contrary, since February 2020, my opponent has demonstrated he does not contain the requisite temperament. In just a few months of campaigning, my opponent has admitted to taking campaign literature from other candidates off of voter's properties and is currently under investigation for accosting our county judge by approaching and outnumbering him in a parking garage and throwing an egg at him. These are just a couple of incidents in my opponent's background that have many in our community concerned to bring their most important legal disputes in front of him. Even the people that have endorsed my opponent admit he is "too easily provoked," who "takes radical positions," and "can be overly critical publicly of groups and people who take positions opposite his." My opponent's behavior even caused the Patriots PAC to renounce their endorsement of him, stating his behavior is violative to the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. I have not only proven I have the proper temperament, not only in this campaign, but in my career. I have kept my endorsements, and have inspired more voters to support me.
How would you go about managing this court's docket efficiently and effectively?
As previously mentioned, the 457th District Court was created for one reason: Docket Management. To efficiently manage the docket it starts with hiring a professional, talented, hard working staff. I will also put in work. I will work Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. I will also be available after hours not avoiding my on-call responsibilities. A docket control order will be issued in every case immediately following the filing of an answer. This docket control order will have hard and fast dates consistent with the local rules, providing the scheduling and deadlines for the entire age of the case. I will require both parties to engage in good faith mediation in an effort to dispose of the case pretrial. Dispositive motions dockets will be set by both in court and by submission, with quick rulings. I will also have status dockets to ensure cases are proceeding according to the docket control order.
Where can voters go for more information about you?
Read more:
Texas Voters: Meet the Candidates Running for Judge in July Primary Runoffs
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
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-58
- 2Sweet James Clinches $17.4M Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California's Kings County
- 3In Lame-Duck Session, US Senate Confirms Illinois Federal Judge on Bipartisan Vote
- 4Gordon Rees Opens 80th Office, ‘Collaboration Hub’ in Palo Alto
- 5The White Stripes Drop Copyright Claim Against Trump Campaign
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