Another Void Order, this Time by the Disqualified Judge, Susan Brown
Originally Published: Apr 11, 2023 | Republished: Apr 12, 2023
From: Mark Burke
browserweb@gmail.com
doctor@kingwooddr.com
To:
Rebecca Brite, Exec. Asst, Eleventh Administrative Judicial Region of Texas
Rebecca_Brite@justex.net
Cc:
Tracy Conroy, Exec. Asst, Second Administrative Judicial Region of Texas
Tracy.Conroy@mctx.org
Melissa Love, Operations Coordinator for Civil and Family District Courts
Melissa_Love@justex.net
Serpe Andrews, PLLC: Nicole Andrews, Madison Addicks (via email)
Shannon North, Clerk for Court 234
shannon.north@hcdistrictclerk.com
Date: April 11, 2023
By email only and filed on docket
Re: “ORDER ON RECUSAL (OBJECTION) TO PRESIDING JUDGE” signed by Hon. Susan Brown – 2022-68307 – Mark Burke Vs. KPH Consolidated, Inc., Et Al
Dear Ms. Brite,
I acknowledge receipt of your email with enclosed Order, signed by Judge Brown. It is void for lack of jurisdiction and/or erroneous in law for the following reasons:-
At 2.48 pm this afternoon, and in response to my morning email notice advising the court that Judge Trapp’s Order was void, I received the above “Order”, wherein it incorrectly states I filed a motion.
FACTS
First, I never filed a motion.
Second, I never filed a Motion to Recuse. See; “Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify Judge Lauren Reeder and Verified Declaration, Image No. 107121410, and Plaintiff’s Verified Declaration in Support of Motion to Disqualify Judge Lauren Reeder Image No. 107121411.
Third, Judge Reeder’s Order is labeled “ORDER SIGNED DENYING RECUSAL OF JUDGE, Image No. 07147127.
Fourth, the “Order” alleges; “All parties were notified of the hearing on March 24, 2023. The motion to “recuse” or object was filed with the clerk on April 3, 2023, eleven days after the notice of hearing making the objection untimely.”.
This is patently false. I sent a timely email notice of objection on Thursday March 30, 2023 in strict compliance with the rules and within seven days, see; Tex. Gov’t Code § 74.053 (“(f) For purposes of this section, notice of an assignment may be given and an objection to an assignment may be filed by electronic mail.”).” Nowhere does it say filed “on the docket”, “with the court” or via “a motion”. Despite this, the void Order makes reference to an imaginary “Motion to Object”. Indeed, no “Order” was filed onto the docket by the Eleventh Administrative Judicial Region of Texas or as Presiding Judge of Harris County District Court No. 234, announcing the hearing before Judge Brown. No, on the contrary, it was sent via email as a word document, e.g., electronic mail.
Furthermore, Judge Susan Brown and the Court were on notice about these facts via email correspondence I had with the officers of the court prior to either Judge Brown’s “referral” to the Supreme Court Chief Justice Hecht or Judge Trapp becoming involved.
In summary, the hasty change of course in this latest void Order is unavailing, insincere, and very alarming. I find the Court’s unyielding stance, when they are clearly misapplying the law, very disconcerting. As such, I have no doubt, it will become necessary to return to this chapter of acts unbecoming of the judiciary again in the near future.
JURISDICTION
For the reasons stated above and as provided in earlier correspondence on this matter, Judge Susan Brown is disqualified and remains so. Today’s Order by a disqualified judge is void for lack of jurisdiction and void in law. See; Anderson v. Port Arthur, No. 14-09-00029-CV, at *1 (Tex. App. Sep. 21, 2010).
CONCLUSION
Less than a week ago, on April 5, Chief Justice Nathan Hecht concluded his State of the Judiciary Speech with the following words;
“The Texas Judiciary is committed to upholding the rule of law. It is committed to a court system that is fair, efficient, and just, interpreting and applying the law guided by fixed principles. And it is committed to a justice system that is accessible to all, regardless of means.”
I, along with many Citizens in the State contend his statement belies the truth. However, my hope is one day, when money is removed from judicial campaigns and politics, it may come true. Until then, this is my latest response.
Sincerely,
Mark Burke
Plaintiff (Pro Se)
Judge Robert H. Trapp Improvidently Assigned by Chief Justice Nathan Hecht
Originally Published: Apr. 10, 2023 | Republished: Apr. 12, 2023
From: Mark Burke
browserweb@gmail.com
doctor@kingwooddr.com
To:
Tracy Conroy
Exec. Asst, Second Administrative Judicial Region of Texas
Tracy.Conroy@mctx.org
Cc:
Melissa Love
Operations Coordinator for Civil and Family District Courts
Melissa_Love@justex.net
Cc: Serpe Andrews, PLLC: Nicole Andrews, Madison Addicks (via email)
Cc: Shannon North
Clerk for Court 234
shannon.north@hcdistrictclerk.com
Date: April 10, 2023
By email only and filed on docket
Re: “Order Denying Motion to Recuse” signed by Presiding Judge Trapp – 2022-68307 – Mark Burke Vs. KPH Consolidated, Inc., Et Al
Dear Ms. Conroy
I acknowledge receipt of your email with enclosed Order, which is void for the following reasons:-
Early this morning I received a copy of the Texas Supreme Court Order dated April 6, 2023, assigning the Hon. Judge Robert H. Trapp to preside over my mandatory disqualification of the assigned Administrative Judge, The Honorable Susan Brown, Presiding Judge of the 11th Administrative Region, and wherein I cited Anderson v. Port Arthur, No. 14-09-00029-CV, at *1 (Tex. App. Sep. 21, 2010) (“Because Anderson filed a timely objection to the Administrative Judge under section 74.053, disqualification of that judge was mandatory, and the Administrative Judge should have assigned another judge to hear Anderson’s recusal motion. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 74.053; TEX. R. CIV. P. 18a(d); In re Perritt, 992 S.W.2d at 446-47; Flores, 932 S.W.2d at 501-02. ”).
The Supreme Court also referenced section 74.053 in their letter of [re]assignment signed by Chief Justice Nathan Hecht. Curiously, this letter states that Presiding Judge Susan Brown “declines to recuse herself”. Alas, Presiding Judge Susan Brown does not have that option, according to Anderson.
Next, I turn to the “Order Denying Motion to Recuse”, signed by Presiding Judge Trapp and received at around 4 p.m. The Order does not rely upon, or at any time mention or refer to section 74.053, but rather Rule 18(a) and (b). That is not applicable for the reasons stated above.
In conclusion, the mandatory Disqualification of Presiding Judge Susan Brown is non-negotiable, and hence the Court’s Order discussed herein is void.
Sincerely,
Mark Burke
Plaintiff (Pro Se)
Letter of Assignment of Judge Robert H. Trapp by Chief Justice Nathan Hecht
Originally Published: Apr. 10, 2023 | Republished: Apr. 12, 2023
CHIEF JUSTICE NATHAN L. HECHT
JUSTICES
DEBRA H. LEHRMANN
JEFFREY S. BOYD
JOHN P. DEVINE
JAMES D. BLACKLOCK
J. BRETT BUSBY
JANE N. BLAND
REBECA A. HUDDLE
EVAN A. YOUNG
201 West 14th Street
Post Office Box 12248
Austin TX 78711
Telephone: 512/463-1312
Facsimile: 512/463-1365
April 6, 2023
CLERK
BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE
GENERAL COUNSEL NINA HESS HSU
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT NADINE SCHNEIDER
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AMY STARNES
The Honorable Robert H. Trapp
via electronic mail
Presiding Judge,
Second Administrative Judicial Region and Senior District Judge
301 N. Thompson, Suite 102
Conroe, Texas 77301
tracy.conroy@mctx.org
RE: Cause No. 2022-68307; Mark Burke v. KPH Consolidated Inc., et al, In the 234th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas
Dear Judge Trapp:
A Motion to Recuse Presiding Judge Susan Brown has been filed in the above-referenced case. Presiding Judge Susan Brown declines to recuse herself and has referred the motion to me for assignment of a judge to hear and decide the motion.
Pursuant to Chapter 74 of the Texas Government Code, I hereby assign you, a Senior Judge, to the 234th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, for consideration of any and all pending motions to recuse or disqualify Judge Susan Brown in the above-referenced matter. This assignment is effective immediately and will continue as long as may be necessary to rule on this and any subsequent supplemental or amended motions to recuse Judge Susan Brown.
The District Clerk of Harris County shall ensure that all parties and/or counsel of record in this cause receive notice of this order of assignment.
Sincerely,
Nathan L. Hecht Chief Justice
Enclosures
cc: Hon. Susan Brown, Presiding Judge, 11th AJR
via email
Hon. Lauren Reeder, Judge, 234th District Court
via email
Hon. Marilyn Burgess, District Clerk, Harris County
via email
Comptroller’s Office, Judiciary Section
via email