Houston Family Law Corruption
- Home
- Texas Rules
- Case Law
- Local Houston Attorneys & Judge
- Dr. Laura Grubb - CPS for Bruises
- Summary of NonCompliance
- Hearings
- Rule 3.03(a)(1) & Rule 8.04(a)(3) - TDRPC
- Canon 3(B)(8) - Texas Code of Judicial Conduct
- October 21, 2009 Representation to Principal
- October 22, 2009 Signed Order
- Wendy Burgower's October 22, 2009 "ex parte" email to Judge Bonnie Hellums
- State Bar Grievances
- Mandamus/Court of Appeals Ruling
- February 3, 2010 NonCompliance
- Subpoena - October 22, 2009 email
- Rule 12 Judicial Records Request - October 22, 2009 email
- Deletion of the October 22, 2009 email
- Section 36.04 - Improper Influence - Wendy Burgower
- Section 39.02 - Abuse of Official Capacity - Judge Bonnie Hellums
- NonCompliant Email Correspondence
- Personal Attacks on Father's Attorney
August 28, 2009 Hearing
August 28, 2009 Hearing - Injunction
On August 28, 2009, a hearing was held on a Motion for Continuance. Please click on the following link to view the transcript of the hearing: August 28, 2009 hearing transcript.
At the hearing, Wendy Burgower asked Judge Bonnie Hellums of the 247th District Court to enter an injunction against the father, Dan Gawlikowski, from going to his daughter's school at lunch to visit with her. (See Page 8 of the 8-28-09 transcript, Lines 1- 5) The father's attorney, Walter Mahoney, specifically told Judge Hellums that before an injunction can be granted that it required a pleading and evidence that is strongly contested. (See page 11 of the 8-28-09 transcript, lines 4-7)
Mr. Mahoney's statement was disregarded because without any evidence to support the injunction, without a pleading of the injunction, and without the required notice of the injunction which are requirements to granting an injunction pursuant to Rules 681 and 682 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Judge Bonnie Hellums GRANTED the injunction. According to Judge Bonnie Hellums, a Judge, "can put a lot of stuff" on a temporary order on a bandaid. (See Page 11 of 8-28-09 transcript, Lines 15-16). Apparently, the father believes that a "bandaid" in Judge Hellums' Court doesn't need to adhere to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
The father frequently had lunch with his daughter to work with her regarding her reading and vocabulary. This was because his daughter's teacher informed him that his daughter was way behind the rest of the kids in her class. The teacher gave the father a sheet with the areas that his daughter needed to work on. See attached letter from teacher.
As a result of the father's efforts with his daughter during his visits to the school at lunch to work with her, his daughter caught up with the rest of her class. See email from daughter's teacher - Email from teacher.
Parents frequently visit their children at lunch at the father's school on a daily basis. The school handbook welcomes and encourages parents to come to the school to have lunch with their child.
Abuse of Discretion?
Any ruling or judgment from the Court has to be based on a guiding principal of law. The father believes that the request by Wendy Burgower and granting of the injunction by Judge Hellums was in violation of Rules 681 and 682 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
Rules 681 and 682 state that before an injunction can be requested or granted by the Court, it is (1) required to provide a sworn petition (pleading) that is verified by affidavit, (2) a statement of the grounds for the injunction (evidence) and notice of the injunction to the adverse party in accordance with Rule 21 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/rules/trcphome.asp.
Validity of August 28, 2009 Injunction
The order that was signed on August 28, 2009 granting the Motion for Continuance contained the following injunction. The handwritten injunction clearly states that the injunction was valid between the interim time frame of August 28, 2009 and the case rest date of September 29, 2009.
Based on the language of the injunction, the injunction expired on September 29, 2009, which was the date that the hearing was rescheduled.
DISCLAIMER: It is important for all who read the information on this website to understand that these are the OPINIONS of the father based on the evidence provided.
If you have any comments that you would like to make or issues that you would like to discuss, please go to the father's blog at the following link. Father's Blog.
