Constitutional and Due Process Violations

In researcing a fraudulent and neglectful psychologist we came across this case below which is the most egregiousto cross our paths in regards to constitutional violations.

So far we are aware of five cases in Burnet County Courts, Judge Linda Bayless’ courtroom, where due process is not being allowed, court hearings are being held without notification to the parties, ex-parte communications have occured, court orders were signed without hearings, judicial bias in Judge Bayless’ courtroom is determining the outcome of the case (which attorney you have representing you has more merit than all the facts of your case), etc.   Higher courts need to demand due process, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct needs to dicipline these actions or legislature needs to impeach judges for these types of actions.

This case is the most egregious one found so far and has been sent to the Texas Supreme Court.

The Third Court of Appeals and Justice Triana ignored multiple violations of due process, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, American Bar Association Code of Ethics, Texas Judicial Cannons.  The Third Court of Appeals and Justice Triana violated the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 47.1 by replying with a one-sentence denial.

Issues Presented Regarding Judge Bayless, Burnet County Court At Law Judge

Issue No 1 – The trial court / Judge Bayless failed to notify the Relator of it’s intent to enter final orders and no motion for final order had been entered.

Issue No 2 – The trial court / Judge Bayless received proposed final orders ex-parte via email from opposing counsel Trey Brown. Judge Bayless and opposing counsel failed to include Relator in their communications regarding its intent or desire to enter final orders.

Issue No 3 – The day after Judge Bayless received the ex parte proposed final orders via email from opposing counsel, Judge Bayless signed and entered those final orders in her chambers without any hearing Dec 1st, 2017 and without Relators knowledge.  (Relator had only been without an attorney for 72 hours, Judge Bayless and opposing counsel Trey Brown both signed the agreed order releasing Realtors attorney just 72 hours prior.)

Judge Bayless unlawfully ordered things like:

Possession of the child that is against 5 years worth of statements from the child’s two different therapists.
Less than standard visitation for the Relator (who was previously ordered the primary parent).
Arbitrary child support amounts to be paid by the Realtor since no financial information whatsoever was presented since there was no hearing.
Egregious and completely false back child support ordered
Judge Bayless has ignored years worth of many multiple violations of the Children’s Bill of Rights.

Issue No 4 – There was no notice to the Relator who was pro se at the time after the final orders were entered.  By law, notice has to be sent of any orders entered.

Issue No 5 – The trial court has refused multiple requests for a hearing or a decision on the bill of review that was filed by the relator (because the time to Appeal had passed due to the lack of notification) and the judge has stated to both realtors and opposing counsel that she is going to deny the bill of review without a hearing. Judge Bayless has made it clear that she will put the relator in jail for 6 months and only allow her supervised visitation of her child if she continues to pursue the bill of review to correct the errors of the court.

Issue No 6 – The trial court improperly determined the punishment and final order of the case depriving appellant of substantial rights and her determinations of this punishment was from information obtained outside of any court setting and without a hearing

Issue No 7 – Judge Bayless refused to recuse herself when there was more than sufficient evidence to prove a violation of due process and unquestionable bias.