When does "expedite" mean "eliminate"?

The Texas Supreme Court's Advisory Committee will be meeting Friday, January 27th and Saturday, January 28th to discuss--among other things--the proposal that the Court's task force has assembled to implement House Bill 274.  In relevant part, House Bill 274 requires the Court to adopt rules for a "prompt, efficient, and cost-effective resolution of civil actions" for claims that do not exceed $100,000.  The house bill provides that the rules to be adopted must address the procedure for "ensuring that these actions will be expedited in the civil justice system."  So why would the task force propose a rule that all but eliminates an appeal except in the narrowest of circumstances?  That doesn't sound like a procedure for expediting an appeal.

The Task Force has presented proposed Rules 262.4 and 262.5.  Proposed subparagraph 262.5(e) deals with appeals and would allow for an appeal in a case under the expedited jury trial process only in (1) cases of judicial misconduct, (2) jury misconduct, (3) corruption, fraud, or undue means that prevented a fair trial, or (4) summary judgments.  In other words, no challenges to factual or legal sufficiency.  No challenges to jury charges.  No challenges to the form of the judgment.  Is this procedure expediting an appeal, or eliminating an appeal?  I thought perhaps that there was some definition of "expedite" that I was missing, so I looked it up to make sure.  Nope.  But I did find it interesting that some thesauruses list "block," "cease," "curtail," and "halt" as antonyms of expedite.  I have to wonder how many of my clients will realize or understand that they are essentially giving up their appellate rights to challenge the outcome by agreeing to the expedited process. 

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
Comments (2) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Steven Frankoff - January 26, 2012 5:46 PM

How can we fight this type of bill and what this means to the appellate process? Considering some of the judges that get elected in this state this is a very bad idea.

Mike Northrup - January 27, 2012 8:16 AM

So, I've had several comments and questions about this posting. For those of you who are concerned about this rule, I recommend that you contact Marisa Secco at the Texas Supreme Court. She's the rules attorney in charge of compiling such comments and passing them along to the court and to the Rules Advisory Committee. Her phone number is (512) 463-1353. The court's mailing address is PO Box 12248, Austin, Texas 78711. I believe her email address is marisa.secco@courts.state.tx.us

Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.

Remember personal info?