4-21-2008
PROCESS SERVICE CZAR; BULL IN A CHINA SHOP
Supreme Court Turns A Blind Eye To Chairman's
Autonomous Iron Fist
In July of 2005, the Texas Supreme Court enacted a certification program for private
process servers in Texas who chose to take advantage of the statewide authority
certification provides. For nearly three years, the board empaneled to oversee the
program has run amok.
In the original Supreme Court docket orders that created the program and the Process
Server Review Board (PSRB,) the concept of certification appeared relatively benign.
Process servers across the state were very excited about finally achieving statewide
authority with what appeared to be a simple and straightforward process. An overly-strict
and burdensome licensing bill had just been purposely killed so that certification could
take effect. The large majority of process servers were in favor of the less restrictive
certification concept over the unnecessary, full-blown government licensing bill.
The original orders were very clear. A person wishing to take advantage of statewide
authority could become certified by meeting three very simple requirements. They had
to be not less than eighteen years of age, have no felony convictions or convictions of
misdemeanors involving moral turpitude, and they had to complete a seven hour training
course. There was nothing in those orders that even remotely resembled regulation.
Nowhere in the orders was the PSRB given the authority to regulate the industry.
However, almost immediately, the PSRB superseded their authority and began fully
regulating certified process servers even taking action against some who were not
certified. They created a complaint form and a method for processing those complaints.
They held hearings, examined witnesses, applied discipline and revoked and/or denied
certifications of some who had never been charged with a crime. They used color of
office to intimidate people and create the appearance of authorities they did not have.
They even assumed subpoena-like authority compelling the appearance of at least one
witness that's known of and the production of documents; an authority only the
Legislature can delegate. I personally witnessed mistreatment of citizens including
public ridicule and unnecessarily harsh discipline on innocent process servers.
While doing these and other unauthorized actions, they failed to perform the duties the
Court set out for them. For example, they certified at least two persons who had been
convicted of a felony and others who had convictions of moral turpitude crimes;
convictions that were suppose to prevent those persons from even applying. They
created a policy for investigating process servers, a policy on conduct affecting
certification, a code of conduct and others.
When they created these policies, they had no authority to implement them, so, they
petitioned the Court for approval. But, while the Court was considering these requests,
the PSRB moved forward and began utilizing the policies without the Court's permission.
For twenty-one months, the Court refused to enact the policies, but, did nothing to
correct the Board's unauthorized behavior.
Finally, in March of 2007, nearly two years later, the Court enacted Rule of Judicial
Administration 14. This rule has very little to do with administration and is clearly a
"regulatory" rule. Found in Rule 14 are many of the authorities the PSRB had been
performing without permission for the first twenty-one months. Instead of stopping the
PSRB from its unauthorized actions, the Court appears to have swept the Board's
improprieties under the rug with the implementation of this rule. The most evident
example is the fact that Rule 14 now allows persons with felony or other originally
disqualifying convictions to officially apply for certification. With the this new rule, and
the PSRB's unauthorized activities, certification has become nothing like what process
servers were sold. The PSRB, with assistance from the Texas Supreme Court, has
successfully circumvented the Texas Legislature and enacted a form of regulation that
resembles the licensing bill pro-regulators were unable to pass in the session before
certification took effect.
Here is a list of some of the more recent unauthorized actions taken by Czar Weeks.
In December of 2007, Czar Weeks testified at the quarterly PSRB meeting that training
courses needed to be investigated. In that meeting, the Court's Rules Attorney, Jody
Hughes, told the Czar that there was no provision for this. Despite this, Czar Weeks
moved forward with plans to begin investigating and disciplining training course
instructors; instructors who compete with his course.
On January 7, 2008, Czar Weeks called a secret meeting, not open to the public wherein
he made attendance mandatory for all training course instructors. He has no such
authority to call a mandatory meeting. The secret nature of this meeting violates the
spiritof open government and is not allowed with legitimately created regulatory
agencies. In fact, any such secret meeting held by a lawful agency would be a violation
of the Texas Open Meetings Act.
On January 25, 2008, Czar Weeks held the educational providers meeting and set forth
several policies not authorized in Rule 14 or by the Texas Supreme Court's orders. In
this meeting, he claimed the Court delegated the responsibility of monitoring training
classes to the Board. But, the Court has officially stated that they have no records
indicating this. He also appointed himself lead investigator on this autonomous
endeavor telling the course instructors, "We are going to be monitoring your classes,"
and "I'll pursue [this duty] with vigor." Also, many times during the meeting, educational
providers were solicited for their support of fees to be placed on the industry.
In the next PSRB meeting on March 8, 2008, Czar Weeks had the audacity to announce
that the educational providers meeting in January "had a great turn out, 100% in fact."
What he failed to say was that he had commanded educational providers to attend
resulting in the 100% attendance. This was nothing more than an attempt to create an
appearance of cooperation resulting only in an oxymoron of "forced" cooperation.
The following are some of the abuses and disingenuous actions taken before Rule 14
was enacted:
Process Service Czar Weeks is also President of the Texas Process Servers Association.
Without polling his own TPSA members, he spearheaded a recommendation to the Court
that training every three years be switched to a yearly requirement with more hours of
training. Certification had been in place only a few weeks when this recommendation
was made. Czar Weeks continues to teach his association's training class. Yearly
training would increase profits for his association; profits that are used to create,
support and promote legislation that would further regulate the industry. This conflict of
interest would not be allowed had the PSRB been legitimately created by the Texas
Legislature. This recommendation is still on the table for the Court's consideration.
In 2006, before Rule 14 even existed, Czar Weeks "issued" a document which can only be
described as subpoena-like. It compelled the appearance of a witness and the
production of documents. In the preparation of this document, care was taken to avoid
words like "subpoena" and "commanded to appear." However, take a look at this
document for yourself. (To increase or reduce the size of this document, hold down the
control key and move the wheel on your mouse.) It resembles the subpoenas we are all
accustom to serving. It was even "served" on the witness and a common fill-in-the-blank
officer's return is included. Czar Weeks had no authority to "issue" this document. He
has no authority to compel the appearance of a witness or the production of documents.
Even with Rule 14 in place, Czar Weeks cannot issue a subpoena or otherwise compel
the appearance of a witness. The creation of this document was deceptive and its intent
unlawful. Despite this, the Court has done nothing to admonish the Czar or prevent this
practice from reoccurring.
It's clear the PSRB is out of control; and it appears that Chairman Weeks is acting on his
own accord. Multiple attempts to alert government officials, law enforcement and others
who are in positions to do something have failed. It's unfortunate that government
abuse and misconduct is not self-correcting. Sometimes the only way to stop crooked
politicians is by filing a lawsuit. We are asking for comments from the industry or anyone
wishing to comment. Please complete our survey.
Story by:
Tod E. Pendergrass
Director, Texas Process Watch
HOME