Vote By Mail in Texas? Judge Says Yes...For Now

A district court judge in Travis County, Texas has paved the way for Texas voters to be able to request and use mail-in ballots in the upcoming party primary runoff elections scheduled for July 14, 2020, and in the General Election to be held in November. The Texas Democratic Party, its chairman, and two registered Texas voters filed a lawsuit in district court seeking a declaratory judgment holding that Tex. Election Code Sec. 82.002 permits any eligible voter who believes that they are practicing social distancing because of COVID-19, regardless of age or physical condition, to request a mail-in ballot from the county clerk’s office, use that ballot, and have it counted in the upcoming elections. Plaintiffs also sought a temporary and permanent injunction requiring defendants Texas Secretary of State and Travis County Clerk to accept and tabulate those ballots. Several voters groups, including the League of Women Voters of Texas and MOVE Texas Action Fund, intervened, seeking a temporary injunction to enjoin the county from rejecting mail-in ballot applications from voters on the basis of a disability and refusing to accept those ballots during the elections. They also sought to prevent Intervenor-Defendant State of Texas from issuing any guidance or taking any action that would prevent or prohibit the tabulation or submission of mail-in ballots by those voters claiming a disability because of coronavirus. The State of Texas filed a Plea to the Jurisdiction, arguing that plaintiffs lacked standing due to a failure to state a particularized harm, plaintiffs sought an impermissible advisory opinion regarding claims that were not yet ripe, and plaintiff’s claims were barred on the ground of sovereign immunity.

Plaintiffs have filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas San Antonio Division, stating that the election conditions alleged in the petition constitute discrimination in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the 1st, 14th, 15th, and 26th Amendments. Plaintiffs sought both declaratory and injunctive relief.

We at the Harris County Law Library are keeping up with developments in this case as they become available.

Judge Tim Sulak’s Order, dated April 17, is now available here.

NCSC Tiny Chats: Practical Advice for Ensuring A2J During COVID-19

The National Center for State Courts just launched a new series of videos called Tiny Chats, distilled conversations on access to justice topics. These short recordings present information for those working in courts or legal aid organizations or in any other capacity that involves serving people who need accurate, reliable, and up-to-date information about court proceedings during the pandemic. The videos are 10-15 minutes in length, perfect to stream while “walking the dog or taking a break between conference calls.” Tiny Chats are “more digestible than a long webinar and a little bit lighter in tone while staying grounded in practical advice.”

The first presentation is an introduction to what future Tiny Chats will cover and why. NCSC recognizes that the digital divide is real, and that many people during this uncertain time are experiencing financial distress. Given these considerations, they acknowledge that access to justice for these vulnerable populations is even more critical. Providing access to good information is a must. NCSC is tracking what various jurisdictions are doing to spread clear, consistent, timely, and accessible information while courts are not in operation. The information they gather is being used to advise different jurisdictions about the best ways to convey how they are responding to and accommodating the needs of people with legal matters before the courts.  

While the first video introduces the series, the second video presents best practices for clearly communicating messages from the courts. The presenters, Danielle Hirsch and Zach Zarnow, recommend the following·        

  • Ensure that messages are clear and simple, that terms, such as “essential court services,” are well-defined, and that the mechanisms of hearing a case are well-explained.

  • Be consistent in conveying the same message across all platforms, including websites and social media, and do so in a timely manner. Keeping information current instills public confidence in the courts and gives people what they need to know at the point of need.

  • Provide high-quality FAQs and an effective mechanism for gathering feedback, and make sure that information is accessible to those with limited English proficiency or the need for ADA accommodations.

To sign up to be notified of future Tiny Chats, register here: bit.ly/06457

To see all Tiny Chats in one place visit: bit.ly/NCSCTinyChats

Upcoming topics for future Tiny Chats will include Remote Hearings & Services, Clear Communication, ODR 101, Stakeholder Engagement, ODR Vendor Selection, and more.

In addition to the Tiny Chats, NCSC also offers free 30 minute brainstorming and problem solving sessions (The Doctor Is In) allowing those who work in courts to consult about issues related to a Tiny Chat topic. 

To schedule a Doctor Is In session: bit.ly/DRTINYCHAT

Free Access to Lexis (and more!) to Help You #StayHomeWorkSafe

As we all #StayHomeWorkSafe here in Harris County through April 30, access to legal research databases that are typically available at the Law Library may be hard to find. That’s why our law librarians are constantly working with our vendors to make more information available to you remotely during this difficult time. While you’re doing all you can to help stop the spread of COVID-19, we’re still here to help… virtually, of course.

Free Access to Lexis Advance

Access to professional legal resources, like LexisNexis, is essential for legal researchers. Tools like citators, headnotes, and annotations that help researchers determine if a case or statute is still “good law” are copyrighted and only available through expensive database subscriptions (learn more with our on-demand video training Blending Your Legal Research). That’s why free access to Lexis Advance is such a big deal and why we’re very pleased to announce that Harris County Law Library patrons can now sign up for a free 30-day account. Visit the registration page to sign up for your free account now.

Document Delivery from the Law Library’s Legal Research Databases

Even with free access to standard tools from Lexis at your disposal, not every copyrighted practice guide, form book, and treatise is available to you. Under normal circumstances, everyone has access to robust subscriptions from Lexis eBooks, Westlaw, Lexis Advance, HeinOnline, State Bar of Texas Practice Manuals, and more within steps of the courthouse on the Law Library’s research computers. To help maintain access while we’re all working remotely, our law librarians can make many of these materials available to you via email through our Virtual Reference Desk. If you need a document, let us know and one of our law librarians will provide it to you via email (subject to limitations set by the vendor) as soon as possible.

Additional Options to Stay Connected

More free access to legal research databases to keep you working while we #FlattenTheCurve:

Blending Your Research Resources

Learn more about incorporating free online resources into your legal research routine with the Law Library’s one-hour, on-demand CLE video titled “Blending Your Legal Research” Stream it now on our Legal Tech Institute Learn On-Demand page.

You're Out!

Even though the coronavirus has silenced the crack of the bats, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York has hit one out of the park in favor of Major League Baseball (MLB) and our hometown Houston Astros. In an opinion issued on April 3, 2020, Judge Jed S. Rakoff dismissed with prejudice a class action suit brought by five fantasy sports players against MLB, MLB Advanced Media, L.P., Houston Astros, LLC, and Boston Red Sox Baseball Club, LP.

As you may recall, in January of this year, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred suspended for one year Houston Astros General Manager Jeff Luhnow and Manager A.J. Hinch for their roles in the sign-stealing scandal during the 2017 World Series-winning season and extending into 2018, and the Astros organization was fined $5 million and forced to give up first- and second-round picks in 2020 and 2021. The Boston Red Sox had been implicated previously in a similar scandal. As a result of these scandals, plaintiffs filed suit, alleging that they were harmed by defendants’ representations and conduct with respect to the sign-stealing scandal. They asserted claims based on fraud, negligence, unjust enrichment, and under consumer protection laws, all arising from plaintiffs’ contracts with DraftKings, Inc., a fantasy sports contest and sports betting provider. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). The court granted the motion to dismiss. The court made these specific findings:

  • plaintiffs failed to allege statements made by the commissioner indicating a commitment to protect fantasy baseball from any rules violations occurring in the sport;

  • although plaintiffs alleged at least one plausibly false statement made by each of the defendants, such statements could not support fraud claims because plaintiffs could not show that they reasonably relied on those representations when choosing to enter the fantasy baseball contests;

  • plaintiffs did not identify any duty on behalf of defendants to disclose the existence of a sign-stealing plot;

  • plaintiffs’ negligence claim also falls short in that they failed to allege the existence of any duty owed to them by defendants or any reasonable reliance on any affirmative representations made by defendants;

  • plaintiffs failed to allege their consumer protection law claims with the required specificity and could not demonstrate that but for defendants’ deceptive acts, plaintiffs would not have entered the fantasy baseball contests nor was there evidence of a substantial business relationship among the parties and no allegations that defendants made any misrepresentations about fantasy baseball itself; and

  • there was no showing that defendants were enriched at plaintiffs’ expense.

Although our hometown hero Astros were able to eke out a no-hitter in the federal lawsuit, they nevertheless need to bring in their closer: still pending is a lawsuit filed in the Harris County District Court by a season ticket holder, alleging negligence, breach of contract, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Image released into public domain

No matter what you may think of our Houston Astros after the scandal, they were “Houston Strong” at a time when the city needed them most. So, today, in this time of silent bats and stadiums, let’s forget the sign-stealing scandals, the steroid abuse, and the owners’ collusion scheme in the 1980s, and remember the things we love most about the game: dollar hot dogs, that ceremonial first pitch, the team mascots (Orbit, anyone?), and of course, the camaraderie shared at being in the stands with thousands of other fans rooting for your hometown team. Play ball!