McLeod v. Harris
| Decision Date | 30 May 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. B-8228,B-8228 |
| Citation | 582 S.W.2d 772 |
| Parties | Erle Douglas McLEOD, et al., Relator, v. Honorable Ed J. HARRIS, Judge, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Fisher, Roch & Gallagher, Mike T. Gallagher, Houston, Shirley, Shirley & Mackey, Michael G. Shirley, Texas City, for relator.
Elmo Schwab, Thornton & Dunnam, R. Richard Thornton, Galveston, for respondents.
The question presented here is whether respondent, Honorable Edward J. Harris, Judge of the 10th Judicial District Court of Galveston County, is required by the provisions of Article 200a, Section 6 1 to request the Presiding Judge of the Second Administrative District to hear relator's motion to recuse Judge Harris from hearing Cause No. 26,651, In the Matter of the Marriage of Erle Douglas McLeod and Sarah Helms McLeod which is now pending in the 306th Judicial District Court of Galveston County. We hold that the statute requires Judge Harris to make such request and conditionally grant the writ of mandamus.
Section 6 of Article 200a was amended by the 65th Legislature effective August 29, 1977 to provide in part:
(The remainder of this section refers to matters not involved in this controversy.) (Emphasis Added)
Cause No. 26,651, being a suit for divorce, was filed by relator in the 306th Family District Court of Galveston County on June 13, 1978, but was assigned to Judge Harris because of a temporary vacancy in the office of Judge, 306th District Court. On January 26, 1979, relator filed his motion in said cause seeking to have Judge Harris recuse himself from hearing this divorce action because of the close personal relationship of Judge Harris and his wife with Sarah Helms McLeod and because of political differences between relator and Judge Harris. On February 6, 1979, Judge Harris conducted a hearing on said motion after refusing to request the Presiding Judge to appoint another judge to hear the motion and subsequently entered an order denying the motion. 2 Relator declined to offer evidence at this hearing before Judge Harris, but instead filed this proceeding seeking a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Harris to comply with the provisions of Article 200a, Section 6.
The statute states in mandatory language that the district judge Shall request the Presiding Judge to assign a judge to hear any motions to recuse. Respondents urge, however, that this provision has reference only to the preceding sentence of the statute and therefore it is applicable only to election contests or suits brought for the removal of local officials. Neither grammatical construction of the section nor the legislative history of the 1977 amendment justifies such a construction.
The 1977 amendment enumerates several duties of district judges. It provides that he shall rule on a case within three months after that case has been taken under advisement. Also where an election contest or suit brought for the removal of a local official is filed in his court, the district judge "shall request the Presiding Judge of the Administrative Judicial District to assign a judge of the Administrative District who is not a resident of the county" to dispose of such suit. There then follows the sentence in question which states that the district judge "shall request the Presiding Judge to assign a judge of the Administrative District to hear any motions to recuse such district judge from a case pending in his court." This requirement is unrelated to the prior sentence regarding election contests and suits for removal of a local official. Furthermore, there would be no need to repeat the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Texaco, Inc. v. Pennzoil, Co.
...where: (a) he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party.... In support of this argument, Texaco relies upon McLeod v. Harris, 582 S.W.2d 772 (Tex.1979). This reliance is misplaced because McLeod dealt exclusively with the procedural method to be followed when a motion to recuse ha......
-
DeBlanc v. State
...the presiding judge. Because such was not done in this case, appellant asserts that he is entitled to a new trial. See McLeod v. Harris, 582 S.W.2d 772 (Tex.1979). We cannot agree with We hold that Article 200a, Section 6, must be read in conjunction with Rule 18a of the Texas Rules of Civi......
-
State ex rel. Millsap v. Lozano
...a case must by motion to recuse request the judge to initiate the recusal procedure. 10 In 1979 the Texas Supreme Court in McLeod v. Harris, 582 S.W.2d 772 (Tex.1979), a mandamus action, held the requirements of Article 200a, § 6, were mandatory and a district judge must request the presidi......
-
Mosley v. State
...must either grant the motion or refer the motion, so another judge can determine the merits of the motion to recuse. See McLeod v. Harris, 582 S.W.2d 772, 775 (Tex.1979); Jamilah v. Bass, 862 S.W.2d 201, 203 [14th Dist.] 1993, orig. proceeding). Here, Judge Peek properly referred the motion......