Liberty, I'm not busting your chops over this, I really don't know about this case. What I do know is that no judge, especially Lynn Bradshaw-Hull, is going to award $1 out of spite. It would be very easy to over turn on appeal.
Based upon the comments of the retired judge, it appears to me that the landowner didn't follow the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and the Texas Rules of Evidence in terms of meeting the requirements to get evidence of the land's value admitted in court. Was he representing himself? If so, then that was a huge mistake in a case that has a value of at least $1.6 million. I have no sympathy for people who do that. It's like a blind person getting behind the wheel of a car then not wanting to be responsible for the accident he causes simply because everyone should feel sorry for him because he is blind.
The complaint seems to be that the judge wouldn't let evidence of the land's value into the trial. If that's the case, then my educated guess is either 1) the landowner didn't follow the rules of procedure and/or evidence to make it admissible; or 2) he didn't have an expert to testify on that issue. (Laymen can't offer expert opinions.) If this was the case, then the judge had no alternative but to keep inadmissible evidence out of the trial. Without evidence of the land's value, the court is required to award only nominal damages (i.e. $1). Judge Bradshaw-Hull did not have the authority to determine a value on her own, she was bound by the admissible evidence tendered at trial. This is a good example of what I meant when I said earlier that all an attorney can ask for is a fair trial. I want a judge to follow the law, not make it up on their own. If someone represents themselves, or gets poor legal representation, I don't want my client losing because the judge feels sorry for them or doesn't like the outcome the law demands.
Based upon the blog entries, it appears the landowner didn't even bother to go to the pre-litigation hearing when the board was setting a value for the property. His excuse was that he didn't think it was right for the state to take his property. I suspect this cavalier attitude toward the administrative process flowed over to the legal arena and he simply didn't do what was necessary to present his valuation evidence at trial. Imminent domain cases are not in my area of practice, so I'm not sure what the law requires in terms of awarding attorney fees to the prevailing parties. Based upon what you have said, I suspect it is the same as declaratory judgment cases and DTPA cases that do not leave that decision to the discretion of the judge, but require an award of costs and fees. Again, I'm not saying this is the case, only that I suspect it is.
Let me know if you have the case name and I'll research its appellate history. If it was not appealed,there will be no opinion to review. Trial courts in Texas don't issue opinions as do federal district courts.
This case in a nutshell seems to be a situation where the landowner didn't go to the evaluation hearing; took the money that was awarded, then used some of that award to challenge the award in court. When he got to court, he or his attorney apparently didn't follow the law and rules of civil procedure and evidence to get critical evidence admitted during the trial. Because of this, he lost, the court awarded nominal damages/value ($1), so he had to pay back the $1.6 he took before filing suit. It seems to me that his problem was of his own making.
Based on what I've read on your site and the one you cited, coupled with my knowledge of how you get evidence into trial, I believe it is grossly unfair to condemn the judge for the outcome of this case. We decry activist judges who ignore the law and make rulings based upon who they want to win. It appears to me that this is precisely what you wanted Judge Bradshaw-Hill to do. I don't like the current state of immanent domain law one little bit, but the remedy is to change the law, not encourage judges to be activists from the bench.
Chas.
Liberty wrote:Charles,
This Crouson Guy was an active Republican Operative and judge, and went to the same fundraisers as Lynn Bradshaw., notice that he didn't come up with any facts to dispute anything I had claimed. Neither did Lynn-Bradshaw Hull ever dispute the story or the facts when they came out.
She ruined the guy because he dare to attempt to fight a case in court that he couldn't afford to fight. It sounds like he was poorly prepared. If he had just given up his property as a good serf he wouldn't have been ion this mess. Taking the man's family property for 1 dollar, was vindictive. I don't believe we need vindictive Judges. The Democrat who has been been running the court seems to have been able to keep out of the headlines. while I tend to support Democrats I would expect Republicans probate Judges to be a little more landowner friendly in eminent domain cases. In this case it would seem that the opposite might be true.
She could have just thrown out the case. and let it stand.. The issue at hand was that he had cashed the check that was offered of 1.6 million to use on Legal fees. He did so because he thought the 1.6 Million he got wasn't enough. The Houston Port authority had millions our tax bond money at their disposal to fight the case.
I am not lawyer, but it does seem that the system failed this guy, even robbed him. Lynn-Bradshaw was the system that failed him.
By the way The Cruise Terminal in Laporte is finnished is beautiful and unused. Lynn Bradshaw should be proud.
I did link to a news source other than the Rhymes with Right Blog, and did find some other sources .. I never found anything that conflicts with what I had reported. 5 year links do have a way of decaying ... There is
this one but it seems to quote the same sources I used. If Judge Bradshaw or anyone has any information that could justify such harsh actions I would be glad to listen.