District Judge · 135th District Court
What applies in this courtroom
51 verified requirements may apply in this courtroom, by layer: 27 published by Judge Kemper Stephen Williams · 11 county-wide · 2 region-wide · 11 statewide — with 9 rule deadlines across those layers. Only the judge's own rules are specific to this courtroom; the other layers apply by court, county and state scope, and a court- or case-specific order can displace them.
The tabs below show the judge-and-division layer only. The Full Premium Report assembles the complete stack — every requirement, deadline table, ruling intelligence, live case-type scan, and source appendix in one cited document.
Your first 7 Judge Intelligence Reports are free with a free account — no payment card required.
District Judge — 135th District Court, Calhoun County
District Judge — 135th District Court, DeWitt County
District Judge — 135th District Court, Goliad County
District Judge — 135th District Court, Jackson County
District Judge — 135th District Court, Refugio County
Appeals from this courtroom go to the Thirteenth Court of Appeals.
● LiveThat court's published bench (6): Clarissa Silva, Jaime E. Tijerina, Jenny Cron, Jon West, Lionel Aron Peña Jr., Ysmael D. Fonseca
County-to-district assignment per Tex. Gov't Code sec. 22.201(n), live-fetched registry.
27 verified rules specific to this judge's division, grouped by requirement category. 51 total requirements apply in this courtroom across all layers — the Full Premium Report assembles the complete stack.
No judge-level deadline on record runs shorter than a statewide deadline with the same trigger. The sentinel compares quoted timing across every published rule scoped to this judge on each visit — a clean result today is re-earned tomorrow.
Parties in tax lawsuits filed under Texas Tax Code Chapters 31-34 in the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are exempt from the mandatory initial-disclosure requirements of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, but must still timely respond to party-initiated discovery requests.
Parties in tax lawsuits filed under Texas Tax Code Chapters 31-34 in the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are exempt from the mandatory initial-disclosure requirements of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, but must still timely respond to party-initiated discovery requests.
Parties in tax lawsuits filed under Texas Tax Code Chapters 31-34 in the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are exempt from the mandatory initial-disclosure requirements of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, but must still timely respond to party-initiated discovery requests.
Parties in tax lawsuits filed under Texas Tax Code Chapters 31-34 in the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are exempt from the mandatory initial-disclosure requirements of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, but must still timely respond to party-initiated discovery requests.
Parties in tax lawsuits filed under Texas Tax Code Chapters 31-34 in the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are exempt from the mandatory initial-disclosure requirements of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, but must still timely respond to party-initiated discovery requests.
Parties in tax lawsuits filed under Texas Tax Code Chapters 31-34 in the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are exempt from the mandatory initial-disclosure requirements of Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, but must still timely respond to party-initiated discovery requests.
Every aspect of a Title 5 or Chapter 45 Texas Family Code case, including ancillary matters, in which the Title IV-D agency is the moving party is referred to the Associate Judge for Title IV-D Cases appointed to serve the Fourth Administrative Judicial Region.
Every aspect of a Title 5 or Chapter 45 Texas Family Code case, including ancillary matters, in which the Title IV-D agency is the moving party is referred to the Associate Judge for Title IV-D Cases appointed to serve the Fourth Administrative Judicial Region.
Every aspect of a Title 5 or Chapter 45 Texas Family Code case, including ancillary matters, in which the Title IV-D agency is the moving party is referred to the Associate Judge for Title IV-D Cases appointed to serve the Fourth Administrative Judicial Region.
Every aspect of a Title 5 or Chapter 45 Texas Family Code case, including ancillary matters, in which the Title IV-D agency is the moving party is referred to the Associate Judge for Title IV-D Cases appointed to serve the Fourth Administrative Judicial Region.
Every aspect of a Title 5 or Chapter 45 Texas Family Code case, including ancillary matters, in which the Title IV-D agency is the moving party is referred to the Associate Judge for Title IV-D Cases appointed to serve the Fourth Administrative Judicial Region.
Every aspect of a Title 5 or Chapter 45 Texas Family Code case, including ancillary matters, in which the Title IV-D agency is the moving party is referred to the Associate Judge for Title IV-D Cases appointed to serve the Fourth Administrative Judicial Region.
In criminal cases in which defense counsel (Crossroads Defenders) subpoenas records of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, DFPS is ordered to release its records, including audio and video, without redaction by the agreed date, subject to an incorporated protective order (Attachment A); all such records are confidential, remain subject to the order, and must be destroyed by defense counsel when appeals are exhausted or the case is finally disposed.
In criminal cases in which defense counsel (Crossroads Defenders) subpoenas records of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, DFPS is ordered to release its records, including audio and video, without redaction by the agreed date, subject to the incorporated Attachment A protective order: Protected Documents may be disclosed only to counsel of record, their necessary staff, experts and investigators, and the Court; may be used solely for the prosecution or defense of the case; must be returned or destroyed within 20 days (or destroyed within 7 days under documented procedures) after the case ends; and remain confidential thereafter under the Court's continuing jurisdiction.
In criminal cases in which defense counsel (Crossroads Defenders) subpoenas records of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, DFPS is ordered to release its records, including audio and video, without redaction by the agreed date, subject to the incorporated Attachment A protective order: Protected Documents may be disclosed only to counsel of record, their necessary staff, experts and investigators, and the Court; may be used solely for the prosecution or defense of the case; must be returned or destroyed within 20 days (or destroyed within 7 days under documented procedures) after the case ends; and remain confidential thereafter under the Court's continuing jurisdiction.
Local Rules 1.14 and 1.15 of the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are amended so that every request for a motion hearing, non-jury trial or jury trial goes to the Court Coordinator by e-mail or in writing with a copy to all counsel and a certification that the requesting attorney conferred with every party and that the date is agreed — or, if not agreed, that a good-faith effort to agree failed, in which case the Court sets a telephonic or in-chambers docket control conference to fix the date; the rules bind self-represented litigants directly. Effective immediately on signing, December 31, 2014.
Local Rules 1.14 and 1.15 of the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are amended so that every request for a motion hearing, non-jury trial or jury trial goes to the Court Coordinator by e-mail or in writing with a copy to all counsel and a certification that the requesting attorney conferred with every party and that the date is agreed — or, if not agreed, that a good-faith effort to agree failed, in which case the Court sets a telephonic or in-chambers docket control conference to fix the date; the rules bind self-represented litigants directly. Effective immediately on signing, December 31, 2014.
Local Rules 1.14 and 1.15 of the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are amended so that every request for a motion hearing, non-jury trial or jury trial goes to the Court Coordinator by e-mail or in writing with a copy to all counsel and a certification that the requesting attorney conferred with every party and that the date is agreed — or, if not agreed, that a good-faith effort to agree failed, in which case the Court sets a telephonic or in-chambers docket control conference to fix the date; the rules bind self-represented litigants directly. Effective immediately on signing, December 31, 2014.
Local Rules 1.14 and 1.15 of the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are amended so that every request for a motion hearing, non-jury trial or jury trial goes to the Court Coordinator by e-mail or in writing with a copy to all counsel and a certification that the requesting attorney conferred with every party and that the date is agreed — or, if not agreed, that a good-faith effort to agree failed, in which case the Court sets a telephonic or in-chambers docket control conference to fix the date; the rules bind self-represented litigants directly. Effective immediately on signing, December 31, 2014.
Local Rules 1.14 and 1.15 of the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are amended so that every request for a motion hearing, non-jury trial or jury trial goes to the Court Coordinator by e-mail or in writing with a copy to all counsel and a certification that the requesting attorney conferred with every party and that the date is agreed — or, if not agreed, that a good-faith effort to agree failed, in which case the Court sets a telephonic or in-chambers docket control conference to fix the date; the rules bind self-represented litigants directly. Effective immediately on signing, December 31, 2014.
Local Rules 1.14 and 1.15 of the 24th, 135th, 267th and 377th District Courts are amended so that every request for a motion hearing, non-jury trial or jury trial goes to the Court Coordinator by e-mail or in writing with a copy to all counsel and a certification that the requesting attorney conferred with every party and that the date is agreed — or, if not agreed, that a good-faith effort to agree failed, in which case the Court sets a telephonic or in-chambers docket control conference to fix the date; the rules bind self-represented litigants directly. Effective immediately on signing, December 31, 2014.
By standing order of the Local Administrative Judge, every setting notice (or order setting hearing) on a motion for summary judgment must state that argument on the motion is limited to 15 minutes per side.
By standing order of the Local Administrative Judge, every setting notice (or order setting hearing) on a motion for summary judgment must state that argument on the motion is limited to 15 minutes per side.
By standing order of the Local Administrative Judge, every setting notice (or order setting hearing) on a motion for summary judgment must state that argument on the motion is limited to 15 minutes per side.
By standing order of the Local Administrative Judge, every setting notice (or order setting hearing) on a motion for summary judgment must state that argument on the motion is limited to 15 minutes per side.
By standing order of the Local Administrative Judge, every setting notice (or order setting hearing) on a motion for summary judgment must state that argument on the motion is limited to 15 minutes per side.
By standing order of the Local Administrative Judge, every setting notice (or order setting hearing) on a motion for summary judgment must state that argument on the motion is limited to 15 minutes per side.
No judge-scoped deadlines on this tab. Deadlines are extracted only when the source rule text states them — we never infer or calculate dates the rule does not explicitly contain. 9 rule deadlines apply in this courtroom across all layers — assembled with citations in the Full Premium Report.
Timing shown here is quoted from the rule text. Compute your actual date against the court's calendar and the rule itself — not legal advice.
No verified ruling summary yet. BenchPath generates ruling summaries from opinion and docket corpora (CourtListener where covered) and publishes them only after human review — fabricated judicial analytics are exactly what this platform refuses to ship.
The attributed-opinion corpus covers Florida's and California's appellate decisions today; a Texas opinion corpus is a separate build. Absence here is a coverage statement, never evidence about this judge.
Use the live case-law search below to see what exists for this judge today.
Answer three quick questions. The platform pulls Kemper Stephen Williams's full public case-law record from the source, newest first — your matter never narrows the pull; it directs the relevance ranking and the dual-AI analysis. Every hit comes back Bluebook-cited with the opinion's own words quoted verbatim. The scan takes the time precision takes.
Case-law search
CourtListener · free connector · liveCoverage note: CourtListener is strongest for federal courts and state appellate courts. Texas trial-court opinions are essentially absent from the source — an absence of results is a coverage gap, not evidence about this judge.
last checked October 24, 2026
last checked October 8, 2026
last checked October 7, 2026
last checked October 8, 2026
last checked October 8, 2026
last checked October 8, 2026
last checked October 8, 2026
Research connectors
CourtListener
● liveFree Law Project
Free. Opinions, dockets, RECAP, judge metadata. Powering the case-law search on this page.
Westlaw
○ bring your licenseThomson Reuters
Bring your firm's license — enterprise connector queries your judge and related cases inside Westlaw. Phase 2.
LexisNexis
○ bring your licenseRELX
Bring your firm's license — enterprise connector for Lexis+ research tied to your matter. Phase 2.
BenchPath never scrapes licensed databases. Westlaw and LexisNexis connect only through your firm's own credentials and entitlements when the enterprise connectors ship.
District Judge — 135th District Court, Calhoun Countycurrent
date not recorded — present
assignment source →District Judge — 135th District Court, DeWitt Countycurrent
date not recorded — present
assignment source →District Judge — 135th District Court, Goliad Countycurrent
date not recorded — present
assignment source →District Judge — 135th District Court, Jackson Countycurrent
date not recorded — present
assignment source →District Judge — 135th District Court, Refugio Countycurrent
date not recorded — present
assignment source →No source changes detected for this judge yet — when the underlying court pages move, it shows up here first.