The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct has issued a formal public reprimand against 45th District Court Judge Mary Lou Alvarez of Bexar County, citing a broad pattern of misconduct, repeated violations of state law, and persistent disregard of appellate court rulings. The reprimand comes after multiple complaints and a consolidated investigation into Judge Alvarez’s conduct across several cases.
Improper Disqualification and Sanctions in Family Law Case
One of the central incidents occurred in In the Interest of E.R.S., a child custody case in which family law attorney Kate Soulsby represented an intervenor. During the proceedings, Soulsby received medical records through subpoenas. Although she claimed not to have reviewed the records and deleted them in front of opposing counsel, the situation led to a motion for sanctions and a protective order from the opposing party.
On March 7, 2022, Judge Alvarez went beyond the requested sanctions. She not only imposed monetary damages but also disqualified Soulsby from the case on her own motion, prohibited her from communicating with her client’s future counsel, and barred her from taking adverse positions against the opposing party.
The Fourth Court of Appeals later ruled that the record did not support this disqualification, ordering Judge Alvarez to vacate the ruling within ten days. However, Judge Alvarez failed to comply by the deadline. She later attributed the failure to a lack of notification from Bexar County Civil District Courts General Counsel Ryan Anderson. The Commission found her explanation insufficient.
When Soulsby sought Alvarez’s recusal after the appellate court ruling, Judge Sid Harle partially granted the request—recusing Judge Alvarez only from the sanctions hearing, not the entire case. Judge Rosie Alvarado subsequently heard the re-urged motion and ruled in direct contradiction to Alvarez, denying the motion for sanctions and ordering the opposing party to pay attorney’s fees and expert costs.
Issuing Orders Without Allowing Testimony
In another case—the Lindner Matter—Judge Alvarez modified visitation orders after only one day of a scheduled five-day trial. Without allowing testimony from Lindner or Soulsby’s concerns to be heard, Alvarez shifted visitation from supervised to unsupervised.
Alvarez later described her action as a single, two-hour dinner in public, asserting it was within her authority to amend temporary orders. She claimed no objection was raised at the time. Nonetheless, the Commission found that failing to hear from all parties violated procedural fairness and the right to be heard under the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Nineteen Appeals: Repeated Defiance of the Court of Appeals
Judge Alvarez was also reprimanded for her ongoing defiance of appellate precedent in cases involving the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS). Nineteen of her orders were appealed and reversed, at least in part, by the Fourth Court of Appeals.
In one notable case from June 2022, she ordered the Department to pay $2,000 per day for a child’s placement, with an additional $500 subsidy for nine months. The appellate court held this directive violated the Separation of Powers Clause of the Texas Constitution.
Despite that clear ruling, Alvarez later issued at least six more orders that violated the same principles. These included directing DFPS to enter child-specific contracts, disciplining or removing DFPS employees, and ordering payments beyond the statutory timeframes.
In several cases, Alvarez acknowledged she was aware of the appellate rulings. During one hearing, she even referenced them aloud, stating she had the opinions “open on [her] second screen.” Nonetheless, she proceeded to issue rulings in conflict with those decisions.
In one matter, the appellate court had stayed proceedings to prevent further judicial overreach. Yet Alvarez requested a temporary lift of the stay to hold a chambers conference. The court permitted it, clarifying that the Department’s attendance was optional. Alvarez then held the conference without notifying the Department and followed it with an unauthorized hearing where she overruled multiple objections and ordered DFPS to draft an order based on her findings.
In seven of the nineteen mandamus cases, Judge Alvarez failed to vacate her rulings within the appellate court’s required timeframe.
Targeting a Specific Attorney and Using Public Resources for Personal Defense
The Commission also reprimanded Judge Alvarez for her treatment of family law attorney Diane Martinez. On multiple occasions, Alvarez stated she would not appoint Martinez as an amicus attorney—even when both parties had agreed to her role. After Martinez filed a motion to recuse Alvarez in one case, Presiding Judge Harle granted it, reassigning the case to the Bexar County Monitoring Court.
In subsequent hearings, Alvarez continued to publicly comment on Martinez’s alleged lack of involvement in cases. On May 1, 2024, when opposing counsel assumed Martinez was the appointed amicus attorney, Alvarez remarked, “I’m not appointing Diane Martinez,” and expressed shock that Martinez had done no work—despite Martinez never being notified of the appointment. She documented these concerns in her docket notes and repeated similar comments during a June 2024 hearing.
In October 2024, when Martinez was out of the country with a vacation letter on file, Alvarez commented sarcastically about her absence, stating, “I wish I would have known when I was practicing law, that I could have practiced law by proxy,” prompting laughter in the courtroom.
Additionally, Judge Alvarez admitted that she had Bexar County pay for a $712.50 transcript from another courtroom—without disclosing the expense to the Commission—so she could use it in her defense. She acknowledged this was for personal benefit and said she would repay the county “within the next two or three months.”
Commission’s Conclusion
The State Commission on Judicial Conduct concluded that Judge Alvarez violated multiple judicial canons. Specifically, she failed to comply with the law, showed bias, denied parties their right to be heard, lent the prestige of her office for personal benefit, and engaged in persistent conduct inconsistent with her judicial duties.
The Commission cited her pattern of defying appellate rulings, her bias against Martinez, and her unconstitutional rulings in DFPS cases as the basis for a public reprimand under Canons 2A, 2B, 3B(2), 3B(5), and 3B(8) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, as well as Article V, Section 1-a(6)A of the Texas Constitution.
Disclaimer
The content provided in this publication is for educational and informational purposes only. The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News strives to deliver accurate and impactful stories. However, readers are advised to seek professional legal counsel and guidance for their specific legal inquiries and concerns. The publication does not assume any responsibility for actions taken by individuals based on the information presented.
Additionally, while every effort is made to ensure the reliability of the information, the publication does not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the content. Readers are encouraged to verify any legal information with official sources and to use their discretion when interpreting and applying the information provided.
A Couple of Our Other Reads
You may be interested in our publishing on the 772 arrest notifications TCOLE received in 2024..
Or you may find our publishing on a newly elected Texas sheriff’s battle with TCOLE over the accuracy of his personal history statement of interest.
Follow Us on Social Media
If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.
FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News