IS COMMISH SANCHEZ SKIRTING LAWYER-COURTS GAP?

By Juan Montoya

While the courts in Cameron County are in a state of virtual vacation in the month of July, this gives us time to ponder some questions that arose recently involving lawyers sitting on the commissioners court.

It has been mentioned elsewhere that the two lawyers currently on the court (Pct. 3 commissioner Dan Sanchez and Pct. 3 commissioner Alex Dominguez) were not filing affidavits with the local courts asking opposing attorneys if it was ok with them to practice defending clients against them.

In the past, a former county judge (Gilbert Hinojosa) was taken to task for practicing law in the county courts and a Texas Attorney Generals' opinion was requested which basically said that he shouldn't, since it put the opposing counsel at a disadvantage.

This has come to the fore once again when 444th District Court Judge David Sanchez comes before the commissioners court asking for travel money for him and his whole staff at the new Veterans Court (404th) to travel to a conference in Baltimore, Md.,
at a cost of over $20,000.

The commissioners were reluctant to approve the entire staff ( eight of them) to travel and asked the judge if perhaps a staff member could go and then pass the information to the others when he returned. Sanchez was adamant that all should go because they all need to be there.

In the end, the commissioners gave in and approved the request, although grudgingly. Somehow, judge Sanchez was able to find "program monies to pay for four of the and the county picked up the rest of the tab.
This is noteworthy mentioning because commissioner Sanchez asked legal counsel if it would pose a conflict of interest for him to participate and Bruce Hodge told him it would probably not be a good idea and he didn't.
Another instance involved the 10 percent raises given to all district court staff at the request of the district judges. Now, commissioners court is responsible for approving the salaries and budgets of all county departments, so the voting on this general issue is not suspect. What is suspect is that the request was made outside the budget cycle.

And what set tongues wagging was the fact that commissioner Sanchez not only voted to give the staff the increase, but he was the one who actually made the motion to approve the item.
This is what the critics say. Sanchez practices before these courts (as does Dominguez) and voting out of the budget cycle might create the impression of a conflict of interest. Some might say commissioner/lawyer Sanchez might be currying favor with the district courts through his votes (and motion) on their behalf before the commissioners court.
Dominguez, by the way, voted against the raises as did David Garza. Should Dominguez have voted at all?
But the fact that attorney Sanchez made the motion for the travel in the first and then voted out of the budget cycle for raises for the district court staff in the other left many wondering whether he should have voted at all.