On March 1, 2022, the Texas Bar filed suit against Sidney Powell in Texas state court, alleging six ethical violations arising from the election fraud suits she filed on behalf of electors following the 2020 presidential election.
According to a post on the Defending the Republic website, full discovery ensued with multiple depositions, Powell’s production of more than 55,000 pages of documents and a massive privilege log.
On February 22, 2023 the Texas Judge applied settled law and held that the Bar had no evidence as a matter of law that Powell violated any rule in her four election fraud cases.
You can download Judge Bouressa’s order granting summary judgement to Ms. Powell through this link, and we urge CHQ readers to do so to learn just how meritless and incompetently drawn the Bar Association’s complaint against Sidney Powell was. Alternatively, you can read the order for summary judgement online through this link.
Judge Andrea Bouressa, of Collin County District Court, said in the decision dated last Wednesday that she had difficulties finding evidence that the state bar tried to cite in the case. As a result, she considered only two of eight exhibits the commission filed.
As the American Bar Association Journal reported, Judge Bouressa said the commission listed Exhibits A through F “purportedly in its appendix” of one of its court documents. But the actual documents in the appendix were marked A through H and didn’t match the documents described in the brief. In addition, the commission made only three citations to two documents when describing summary judgment evidence. One of those citations referred to Exhibit E, but it appeared to be describing material in Exhibit G.
“The court alerted the parties to difficulty locating materials cited in the commission’s brief, but the commission responded that no corrective action was necessary,” Bouressa wrote in her decision.
Because of the “numerous defects” in the commission’s exhibits, Bouressa considered only two documents. Bouressa said only one was “competent summary judgment evidence”—a pleading filed by Powell.
Bouressa cited another commission failure: It did not respond to Powell’s motion challenging elements of the commission’s claims. As a result, Bouressa sided with Powell on that issue.
“With the commission’s sole competent summary judgment evidence being Exhibit F, considered solely for its limited purpose—evidence of a pleading filed by Powell and others—the commission has failed to meet its burden,” Bouressa said.
The bottom line: state bar regulators failed to present enough valid evidence to keep alive claims that Ms. Powell violated ethics rules by filing “frivolous” post-election lawsuits.
2020 Election Suits
Election Fraud cases
Judge Andrea Bouressa