Loading…
Premium Judge Intelligence Report
Members-only reportSign in to open the full report.
Create a free account to keep this dossier and its scan results, then open the full report as a $29 Single Report or with Professional (25 reports / month). Unlocked reports stay open on your account permanently.
Create your free account →
Baylor G. Wortham
District Judge · 136th District Court · Jefferson County, Texas
High confidence· verified August 30, 2026
- verified requirements
- 25
- verified requirements
- rule deadlines
- 9
- rule deadlines
- sources cited
- 3
- sources cited
- reviewed insights
- 0
- reviewed insights
- verified rulings
- 0
- verified rulings
Verification profile
- High · 25
- Medium · 0
- Low · 0
- Unverified · 0
Report generated October 25, 2026 · benchpath.ai/reports/judge/tx-baylor-g-wortham
01 Division & assignment
District Judge — 136th District Court, Jefferson County
02 Live Case-Type Intelligence Scan
Live case-type intelligence scan
● LiveAnswer three quick questions. The platform pulls Baylor G. Wortham'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.
- 1. Case area & type
- 2. Refine
- 3. Review & scan
Case-law search
CourtListener · free connector · liveCoverage note: CourtListener is strongest for federal and state appellate courts; Texas trial-court opinions are essentially absent from the source.
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.
03 Division intelligence
Appellate exposure
Appeals from this courtroom go to the Ninth Court of Appeals.
● LiveThat court's published bench (4): Jay Wright, Kent Chambers, Leanne Johnson, Scott Golemon
County-to-district assignment per Tex. Gov't Code sec. 22.201(j), live-fetched registry.
Local-rule conflict sentinel
● LiveNo 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.
05 Procedural requirements (25)
06 Deadline table
07 Ruling intelligence
No verified ruling summary yet — summaries publish only after human review of a real opinion/docket corpus. The live scan at the top of this report covers what public sources hold today.
08 Source appendix (3)
- TOPICs — Texas local rules registry (topics.txcourts.gov)Healthychecked October 24, 2026
- Supreme Court of Texas — Rules & Standards (statewide compilations)Healthychecked October 19, 2026
- Jefferson County District Courts — court website (jeffersoncountytx.gov; documents on blobs.jeffersoncountytx.gov)Healthychecked October 5, 2026
09 Recent change events
- October 19, 2026Monitor detected a source-content or hash-basis change. Review the archived bytes before republishing dependent material.
10 Contribute ground truth
Intelligence skills executed on this report
Procedural FingerprintConferral Stack AnalyzerDeadline Matrix BuilderAI-Filing Policy DetectorEx Parte & Motion-Calendar DecoderProposed-Order Protocol ExtractorRuling Corpus ScannerDivision Peer DeltaReassignment & Vacancy RadarSource Freshness AuditorChambers Access CardAppellate Exposure MapperAttorney Ground-Truth IntakeLocal-Rule Conflict Sentinel
This report compiles procedural information and public-record research from the official sources cited above, with per-item verification status. It is not legal advice, contains no outcome predictions, is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney, and creates no attorney–client relationship. Items below high confidence must be verified against the official source before relying on them. Print with your browser for a clean PDF.