![]() Spencer Selvidge for the San Antonio Express News / Spencer Selvidge for the San Antonio Express News Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Nathan Hecht speaking at the Texas Supreme Court in 2018. Hecht declined to comment Boyd has not responded to a request for comment. The two justices who heard the case while campaigning are Chief Justice Nathan L. In June, it sided with Apache and against the jury’s findings, concluding that the company was going to fire Davis before she complained about discrimination. This time, the Supreme Court, upon reconsideration, agreed to hear the case. Two weeks later, Apache filed its motion for rehearing. ![]() “As long as Texas continues to use an election system to select our judges, it is imperative that voters be well informed about their choices,” she said. They were the only races on which the new organization spent money.Īlthough the Judicial Fairness PAC funded only the Supreme Court races last year, in the future it plans to participate in judicial races at all levels, said Texans for Lawsuit Reform spokeswoman Lucy Nashed. Funded heavily by Texans for Lawsuit Reform, which has contributed lavishly in its efforts to rein in large jury awards, among other aims, the PAC spent a total of $4.5 million supporting the four candidates. Over the next several days, the Judicial Fairness PAC spent $750,000 on television and radio ads supporting the incumbent Texas Supreme Court justices, records show. Yet there is a loophole: Unlike with direct contributions, there is no ceiling on how much money the groups can spend independently on behalf of candidates. Texas law limits how much PACs can contribute to judicial candidates. ![]() GRID RULING : Texas Supreme Court punts on whether ERCOT is immune from storm lawsuits The contribution appears to be just the second Apache has made in a judicial race the other was for $2,500 and was made nearly a decade ago. But state records show the donation to the PAC dwarfed its previous gifts. The Fortune 600 oil company has given money to political candidates before. Three weeks after the court’s denial of the appeal, Apache donated $250,000 to a newly formed political action committee, Judicial Fairness PAC. (In all, four were up for election but two recused themselves from the case because they had worked on Apache v. Texas is one of only four states with partisan Supreme Court elections, and Apache’s appeal occurred while two of the nine Republican justices were simultaneously campaigning and making decisions about the company’s case. Nevertheless, Apache notified the Supreme Court it intended to ask for a so-called rehearing.Īfter the company contributed $250,000 in political support to justices seeking re-election, the court changed its mind. Litigants can ask the state’s highest civil court to reconsider such decisions, but it’s a long shot nearly 98 percent of the time, it refuses, according to research by the Texas Bar.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |