Loading…
Petitions for expunction, for an order of non-disclosure and to seal a case are excepted from the requirement that attorneys file civil cases electronically; whether filed pro se or by counsel, they may be filed in person, by hand and on paper.
Applies to petitions for expunction, non-disclosure and sealing filed in the 49th, 111th, 341st and 406th District Courts of Webb County. Procedural information only; not legal advice.
RESOLUTION. "WHEREAS, at the Administrative Board of District Judges meeting held on October 7, 2015, the District Judges agreed that any petition for expunction, petition for non-disclosure, or petition to seal case, be excepted from the requirement that all civil cases filed by and through an attorney be filed electronically; WHEREAS, the District Judges agreed that whether a petition for expunction, petition for non-disclosure, or a petition to seal case, is filed by a Pro Se individual or by and through an attorney, said petition may be filed in person, by hand, and in paper." THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the filing of a petition for expunction, petition for non-disclosure, or a petition to seal case, shall be excepted from the requirement that all civil cases filed by and through an attorney be filed electronically." Adopted by the Board of District Judges on this 7th day of October, 2015, in Laredo, Webb County, Texas. Hon. Beckie Palomo, 341st Judicial District Court Judge, Local Administrative Judge, District Courts; Hon. Jose "Joe" Lopez, 49th Judicial District Court Judge; Hon. Monica Z. Notzon, 111th Judicial District Court Judge; Hon. Oscar J. Hale, Jr., 406th Judicial District Court Judge.
RESOLUTION. "WHEREAS, at the Administrative Board of District Judges meeting held on October 7, 2015, the District Judges agreed that any petition for expunction, petition for non-disclosure, or petition to seal case, be excepted from the requirement that all civil cases filed by and through an attorney be filed electronically; WHEREAS, the District Judges agreed that whether a petition for expunc
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-09-07 from the TOPICs custody scan (one page; the OCR text layer is garbled, so the page was read through the vision lane). Four signers (Judge Hale has since left the 406th), so no judge join; the adoption day is handwritten as "7th" and matches the meeting date recited in the text. The District Clerk's file-stamp (September 2015) partly overlays the signature block and is not asserted.
Judge Costello's AI section simply restates amended Rule 2.515(d)(2) — the post-AOSC26-12 statewide standard — a compliance model, not a local mandate: signers certify cited authorities exist and are accurately cited, with the rule's own sanctions.
The strongest in-the-wild confirmation of the 2026 statewide AI rule: Judge Bantner's page expressly states his prior AI requirements are REMOVED because of the May 28, 2026 amendment of Rule 2.515 — signing a filing now itself certifies the authorities exist and are accurately cited.