State Judges

Don't Do What This Judge (Allegedly) Did

Texas judge faces malicious prosecution lawsuit.

By  
on

judge and gavel[UPDATE 9/29/17: There’s a quick update on the disposition of this case below.]

You’d think a judge would be the first person to respect the legal process. Even if he or she found a legal matter frivolous, one would expect a judge, in the interest of serving as a role model and setting a proper example for the lawyers and parties who enter the courtroom, to respect the service of process.

In other words, one wouldn’t expect to hear allegations that a judge tried to duck a process server, used bailiffs to threaten the guy, or pilfered money from an indigent defense fund to prosecute the server. But, hey, we’ve seen judges handcuff lawyers, beat up public defenders, and be Wade McCree, so nothing’s really a surprise anymore.

An appellate court in Texas is allowing a process server to go forward with a malicious prosecution and civil conspiracy lawsuit against former state judge Layne Walker, now of Provost Umphrey in Beaumont, Texas. Walker attempted to kick the case based on the state’s anti-SLAPP statute (the server made a defamation claim, which he later dropped) and his absolute immunity as a judge. The appellate panel, for the most part, disagreed with the former judge’s interpretation.

Law.com has the blow-by-blow of this service gone wacky:

In 2013, Stephen Hartman, a licensed investigator and process server, entered the courtroom of 252nd District Court Layne Walker where the judge was presiding to serve him with a summons for a lawsuit. Walker served on the bench from 2003 until his retirement in 2014. He joined Beaumont’s Provost Umphrey in 2015.

Hartman alleged that for safety reasons, he attempted to serve Walker at the courthouse because when he previously showed up at Walker’s residence, Walker had a gun and Walker’s son chest-bumped him. When Hartman notified Walker’s bailiffs why he was in the courtroom, they rushed him, pushed him toward the door and stated he needed to “leave or go under arrest.”

Hartman alleged that he did not attempt to serve Walker with the summons in his courtroom but that three bailiffs later allowed him to serve Walker in a jury room. Hartman was told by the bailiffs that he would be charged with interfering with public duties and disrupting a meeting. He was later placed under arrest.

Of course there’d be a gun involved, because this is Texas and I’m sure their stand your ground laws cover receiving a summons. Taking the allegations at face value, sending the bailiffs to interfere, perhaps violently, with the service of process is poor form, but the appellate court agreed with the former judge that this would fall within Walker’s absolute judicial immunity.

Sponsored

Unfortunately for Walker, there are more allegations:

Hartman’s other allegations include: Walker’s bailiffs seized a recording device that he’d used to record the incident; Walker’s court coordinator maliciously sought to have Hartman’s professional license revoked for three months; Walker hired a district attorney pro tem and illegally used an indigent defense fund to prosecute him; and Walker instructed persons who were in the courtroom during the incident to provide perjured affidavits supporting Hartman’s arrest.

Walker argued — get this — that the court should dismiss all the other causes of actions as “tag-along or related torts” to Hartman’s defamation claim and thus subject to the anti-SLAPP statute. Unsurprisingly, the appellate court did not think allegations of malicious prosecution get waved away like that, because, you know, that would be insane.

Nor did they think the immunity stretched nearly as far as Walker might want. Chief Justice Steve McKeithen wrote:

“Hartman’s alleged causes of action for malicious prosecution and civil conspiracy, as pleaded, occurred after Hartman had been removed from Walker’s courtroom,” he wrote. McKeithen wrote that obtaining alleged perjured witness affidavits and probable cause affidavits that caused Hartman to be maliciously prosecuted, among other things, “are not normal judicial functions.”

Sponsored

It’s only April, but “are not normal judicial functions” is already a candidate for understatement of the year.

[UPDATE 9/29/17: The criminal prosecution of Hartman failed after the internal affairs department found multiple investigative abuses. But after multiple go-arounds, the federal district court dismissed Hartman’s federal claims and declined to exercise jurisdiction over his state claims and the Fifth Circuit affirmed. This development… sets up the next paragraph perfectly.]

Again, the more troubling allegations of malicious prosecution are just that, but even if all of those allegations are false and Walker ultimately prevails in this case, judges still shouldn’t be throwing impediments in the way of process servers. Even if arresting the guy is covered by immunity, just take the summons graciously and deal with it. You’re judges! You’ve got to be better than this. How is anyone supposed to trust the judicial process if you present even the appearance of trying to dodge it?

He Got Served. What Happened Next Has Former Texas Judge in Hot Seat [Law.com]

Earlier: Judge Banned From Sitting On The Bench Ever Again
Judge Beats Up Public Defender

HeadshotJoe Patrice is an editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news.

Topics

, , ,