Texas House Bill HB1381

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of House Committee: 4/11/11
• Introduced: 2/15/11
• Voted on by House: 4/25/11
• Refer: 3/1/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/12/11
• Report Pass: 4/6/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/19/11
• Engrossed: 4/25/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 4/29/11
• Report Pass: 5/12/11
• Enrolled: 5/21/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the service of civil process on an inmate of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.

Impact

The act amends the Civil Practice and Remedies Code by adding specific provisions that clarify the process for serving civil documents to inmates. The changes aim to improve the efficiency of legal proceedings involving inmates and reduce confusion around the current lack of established protocols. By instituting these requirements, the legislation not only reinforces the legal rights of inmates to be informed of ongoing civil matters but also seeks to facilitate better interaction between legal practitioners and the Texas correctional facilities.

Summary

House Bill 1381 addresses the service of civil process on inmates of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. This legislation provides a framework for serving civil process in actions involving inmates, defining clear procedures to facilitate this legal requirement. The bill mandates that each facility operated by or contracted with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice appoint a designated employee responsible for accepting and delivering civil process to the appropriate inmate. This is intended to streamline legal processes and ensure that inmates are properly notified of civil actions against them, promoting access to justice within the correctional system.

Contention

Discussions surrounding HB 1381 have highlighted the balance between maintaining order within correctional institutions and ensuring the legal rights of inmates are respected. While the bill has received broad support for improving the judicial process concerning inmates, some concerns have been raised about potential administrative burdens on prison staff. Opponents worry that implementation may require additional training and resources, which could divert attention from other critical responsibilities within the correctional system.