Andrea Plumlee

During her time on the bench, she has seen an unusually large number of her decisions reversed by appellate courts, specifically the Fifth Court of Appeals of Texas. One of the most commonly-cited reasons for the reversals is that she “abused her discretion” when handing down her decisions.[2][3]

For example:[2]

• In the Jesus and Maria Villa divorce case, Plumlee did not notify the husband Jesus about the default judgment hearing, and she handed down a default judgment against him anyway. Afterward, the Fifth Court of Appeals determined that she had violated his constitutional rights to due process.
• In the case of Re Young, she ordered it genetic testing be done, even though the statute of limitations had expired. The Fifth Court of Appeals determined that she had abused her discretion in that case.
• On an appeal of the case “In the interest of D. T., a child,” the appeals court determined that her pattern of behavior show that she was “exceeding her authority."

A decision Plumlee had made was called out in a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court case. The case involved a situation where federal law’s jurisdiction superseded that of the her Texas state court, presenting issues related to the failure of the her court, the 330th Family District Court, Dallas County, Texas, to observe federal jurisdiction during a removal. The Supreme Court record reflects comments she had made (“This is a state court”) during a decision she handed down that explicitly refused to observe federal jurisdiction during a removal.[6]

On her campaign website, she describes herself as an “experienced and knowledgeable family law attorney” and as a judge whose “expertise and fairness is widely praised.”[5]

According to the Southeast Texas Record, while Plumlee isn’t up for re-election in 2020, political mailers about her behavior began being sent to voters in March 2020. The mailers are negative, saying that Plumlee has “a troubling record of unfairly treating fathers.” The backside of the mailer said that she is “UNFAIR, UNFIT, UNETHICAL."[7]

When Plumlee was up for re-election in 2014 after her first four-year term, the Dallas Morning News decided to explicitly endorse her opponent in the primary election, Randall Grubbs. The newspaper wrote, “While every new judge has a learning curve, Plumlee, 49, has not distinguished herself in the eyes of attorneys.”[1]

Less than 40 percent of family law attorneys who were polled about her believed that she was impartial or even demonstrated an “adequate” knowledge of the law. According to the Dallas Morning News, Plumlee is not board-certified in family law and before she was elected in 2010, she had no experience as a judge.[1]