From Kelly Reid Walls 2 hrs · A good morning in County Court #10 for the Lola case. Michelle Maloney, representing the Reverend Will Rice and his dog Lola, filed a Motion for Reconsideration of Appellant’s Jury Demand and Motion to Strike Case from Non-Jury Docket. Michelle also asked for a continuance. Judge Tina Torres was the presiding judge and she granted the motion for a continuance. Judge Torres referred the Motion for Reconsideration of Appellant’s Jury Demand and Motion to Strike Case from Non-Jury Docket back to Judge Johnson as he was the first judge to hear this case. Strickland v. Medlen, 397 S.W.3d 184 (Tex. 2013) holds that “pets are property in the eyes of the law.” Accordingly, Judge Torres noted the right to a jury trial is the bedrock of our legal system when the state seeks to deprive a citizen of their property. In her motion, Michelle noted that Granger v. Folk, 931 S.W.2d 390, 393 (Tex. App. – Beaumont, 1996 Beaumont Court of Appeals ruled: “It is fundamental to our system of justice and the intention and policy of the law to permit all persons to have a trial by jury of any facts affecting their property rights.” In Granger, the appellant was charged with animal cruelty and his animals were seized under Section 821.021 of the Texas Health and Safety Code (a civil statute). That statute provided that, when a cruelty determination is made, the owner shall be divested of the animal and the animal would be sold at auction, given to a shelter, or killed. In appealing this decision to County Court, Granger requested a jury trial as the statute provided for a trial de novo on appeal. However, he was denied a jury trial in County Court. Granger sought mandamus of this denial of his fundamental right to a jury trial the Beaumont Court of Appeals. The State of Texas, represented by the County Attorney for Jasper County, Texas, argued to the Court of Appeals that Granger was not entitled to a jury trial. The Court of Appeals then held that Granger was entitled to trial by jury, ruling that a civil proceeding such as this: “may subject the defendant to a loss, forfeiture, or confiscation of property rights and interests. In either case, the defendant is entitled to all those guarantees affording full due process.” Sadly, despite both constitutional and case law, COSA attorney Samuel Adams continues to assert San Antonio citizens are not entitled to a jury trial when ACS seeks to deprive citizens of their property. In a bizarre declaration, COSA Attorney Adams asserted he was working this case pro bono for the city. That comment brought chuckles from many observers in the courtroom. — with Asap Prez and 3 others at Bexar County Courthouse.
Posted on: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 21:22:38 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015