FILED: 3/23/2015 10:54:26 AM

SHERRI ADELSTEIN
Denton County District Clerk
By: Elizabeth Jones, Deputy

15-02259-431

No. __________________

DERRICK MATTHEW RICE,

IN THE _____ JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff,
v.
DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS;
WILL TRAVIS, in his Official Capacity as

COURT OF

Sheriff of Denton County, Texas;

SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; and
THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON JAIL STANDARDS;
Defendant

DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW Derrick Matthew Rice, Plaintiff in the above captioned and numbered
cause, complaining of Defendants Denton County, Texas; Will Travis, in his Official capacity
as Sheriff of Denton County, Texas; Securus Technologies, Inc.; and the Texas Commission
on Jail Standards, and for cause of action would respectfully show the Court and jury the
following:
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN LEVEL
1. The Plaintiff affirmatively pleads that he seeks a Declaratory Judgment pursuant to
Chapter 37 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code; a Temporary Restraining
Order, a Temporary Injunction, and a Permanent Injunction, pursuant to Chapter 65 of
the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code; and reasonable costs and attorneys fees
1

pursuant to Section 37.009 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. The Plaintiff
does not seek compensatory or other damages in this original petition. The Plaintiff
intends that discovery in this cause be conducted under Discovery Level 2, as provided for
by Rule 190.3 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff DERRICK MATTHEW RICE (Plaintiff) is a resident of Denton County,
Texas, and is currently confined in the Denton County Jail located in the City of Denton,
Texas.
2. Defendant DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS, is a local governmental entity in the State of
Texas duly created by the Texas Legislature pursuant to Article 9, Section 1 of the
Constitution of the State of Texas. This Defendant must be served with process, pursuant
to Section 17.024(a) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, by delivery of
citation to the Denton County Judge, Mary Horn, at her usual and principle place of
employment located at 110 West Hickory Street, 2nd Floor, Denton, Texas 76201-4116.
3. Defendant WILL TRAVIS is the duly elected Sheriff of Denton County, Texas. He may
be served with process by delivery of citation to his usual and principle place of
employment located at 127 N. Woodrow Lane, Denton, Texas 76205-6397.
4. In addition to service of citation on Denton County Judge Mary Horn and Denton County
Sheriff Will Travis, written notice of this suit shall be timely given to Denton County
Criminal District Attorney Paul Johnson by hand delivery to him at his office located at
1450 E. McKinney, Third floor, Denton, Texas 76209, pursuant to Section 89.0041 of the
Texas Local Government Code.

5. Defendant SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., is a privately owned business entity

duly incorporated under the laws of, and doing business within, the State of Texas. This
action grows out of or is connected with the business transacted in this State by this
Defendant. Service of process pursuant to Section 5.201(b)(1) of the Texas Business
Organizations Code may be effected by serving a citation, directed to this Defendant, on its
agent duly registered with the Texas Secretary of State, to wit: National Registered Agents,
Inc., 1999 Bryan St., Ste. 900, Dallas, Texas 75201-3136.
6. Defendant TEXAS COMMISSION ON JAIL STANDARDS is a regulatory agency of
the State of Texas charged with the establishment and enforcement of reasonable
minimum standards for the construction and operation of all county jails within the State
of Texas. Service of process on this Defendant may be had by serving a citation, directed to
this Defendant, in care of the Texas Secretary of State, via U.S. certified mail, with return
receipt requested, and addressed to the Office of the Texas Secretary of State at P.O. Box
12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. This Court has jurisdiction to consider and decide the merits of this petition pursuant to
Sections 24.008 and 24.011 of the Texas Government Code; and because the subject
matter of this controversy is within the jurisdictional limits of this court.
8. Venue of this cause in this Court is mandatory by virtue of Section 15.015 of the Texas
Civil Practice and Remedies Code.

PARTIAL IDENTIFICATION OF PLAINTIFF

UNDER CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE
9. As required by Section 30.14(a) of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, Plaintiff
states that the last three numbers of his Texas Drivers license are 968, and that the last
three numbers of his Social Security number are 074.
FACTS
10. On December 13, 1994, after proper promulgation under Texas law, Defendant Texas
Commission on Jail Standards (hereafter TCJS) adopted, and thereafter caused to be
effective on December 27, 1994, Title 37, Texas Administrative Code, Section 291.4
(hereafter Section 291.4).
11. As adopted and thereafter made effective on December 27, 1994, Section 291.4 provided
then, and currently provides now in relevant part, that each facility constructing or
operating a county jail in Texas shall have and implement a written plan, approved by
the [Texas Jail Standards] Commission, governing inmate visitation. Further, Section
291.4 (1) provided then, and currently provides now in relevant part, that each inmate
shall be allowed a minimum of two visitation periods per week of at least 20 minutes
duration each.
12. The legislative intent of Defendant TCJS when it properly promulgated, adopted and
caused Section 291.4 to become effective on December 27, 1994, as well as the plain
meaning and common usage of the term visitation in Section 291.4 on December 27,
1994, establish that the term visitation under Section 291.4 required then, and requires
now, that county jails in Texas provide, at a minimum, two in-person or face-to-face
visitation periods per week of at least 20 minutes duration each.

13. Since being properly promulgated, adopted and made effective by Defendant TCJS on
December 27, 1994, there has been no proper promulgation or amendment to Section
291.4 that alters its requirement that county jails in Texas provide, at a minimum, two
in-person or face-to-face visitation periods per week of at least 20 minutes duration
each.
14. On July 8, 2014, Defendant Denton County, by and through its Commissioners Court,
approved a Second Amendment to its prior Master Service Agreement between it
and Defendant Securus Technologies, Inc. (hereafter Securus). Under this Second
Amendment, Defendant Denton County and Defendant Securus entered into a contract
wherein each agreed that Defendant County, and its Sheriff, Defendant Will Travis
(hereafter Travis), would eliminate all face to face visitation between inmates
confined at the Denton County Jail and all non-professional visitors, including but not
limited to inmate family members and friends.
15. Beginning in December of 2014, in accordance with the aforementioned contract between
Defendant Denton County and Defendant Securus, Defendant Travis commenced
eliminating all face to face visitation between inmates confined at the Denton County
Jail and their respective family members and friends.
16. As confirmed by Tim Rich, Administrative Captain at the Denton County Jail, inperson or face-to-face visits between inmates confined at the Denton County Jail and
their respective family members and friends were entirely eliminated by Defendant
Denton County on January 31, 2015.
17. Prior to December of 2014, Defendants Denton County and Travis complied with Section
291.4 and provided two in-person or face-to-face visitation periods per week of at

least 20 minutes duration each between inmates confined in the Denton County Jail and
non-professional visitors, including but not limited to inmate family members and
friends.
18. On February 17, 2015, the very day after local ABC network television affiliate WFAA
broadcast a televised report concerning Defendants illegal elimination of face-to-face jail
visitations between inmates confined at the Denton County Jail and their respective
family members and friends, Defendants Denton County and Travis for the first time
submitted a revised visitation plan to Defendant TCJS, as required by Section 291.4,
seeking approval of their complete elimination of all face-to-face visits between inmates
confined at the Denton County Jail and their respective family members and friends.
19. On February 18, 2015, an unidentified person, acting as an agent of Defendant TCJS, inkstamped the revised jail visitation plan submitted to Defendant TCJS by Defendants
Denton County and Travis on February 17, 2015; circled the word approved on the
area impressed by that ink-stamp; and placed the initials SS in a space provided by the
ink-stamp, indicating approval of the revised jail visitation plan submitted to Defendant
TCJS by Defendants Denton County and Travis on February 17, 2015.
20. Defendants Denton County and Travis, after having been given actual notice of
Plaintiffs claims and a reasonable period to comply, have failed to comply with Section
291.4 with regard to its requirement that county jails in Texas provide, at a minimum,
two in-person or face-to-face visitation periods per week of at least 20 minutes
duration each.

21. On November 3, 2014, Plaintiff was arrested and confined in the Denton County Jail
pursuant to a warrant arising out of the filing of a motion to adjudicate guilt filed by the
State of Texas, by and through Denton County Criminal District Attorney Paul Johnson.
The Plaintiff has been financially unable to post a bail bond to gain his release from
confinement since the time of his arrest, and remains confined in the Denton County Jail
at this time.
22. Beginning in January of 2015, and since that time, Plaintiff has been continuously denied
face-to-face visitation with his family members and friends while confined at the Denton
County Jail, solely as the result of the contract between Defendant Denton County and
Defendant Securus, and performance of that contract, which eliminate[s] all face to face
visitation between inmates confined at the Denton County Jail and all nonprofessional visitors, including but not limited to inmate family members and friends.
23. The Plaintiff, as well as several family members and friends of Plaintiff who desire to
visit Plaintiff at the Denton County jail, face-to-face, have been harmed by the actions of
all Defendants as described above.
LEGAL CLAIMS
24. The legislative intent of Defendant TCJS when it properly promulgated, adopted and
caused Section 291.4 to become effective on December 27, 1994, as well as the plain
meaning and common usage of the term visitation in Section 291.4 on December 27,
1994, establish that the term visitation under Section 291.4 required then, and requires
now, that county jails in Texas provide, at a minimum, two in-person or face-to-face
visitation periods per week of at least 20 minutes duration each.

25. Since being properly promulgated, adopted and made effective by Defendant TCJS on
December 27, 1994, there has been no proper promulgation of any rule or amendment to
Section 291.4, as required by the Texas Administrative Procedure Act, Tex.Gov. Code,
Title 10, Chapter 2001, by either Defendant TCJS or the Texas Legislature, that alters
Section 291.4s requirement that county jails in Texas provide, at a minimum, two inperson or face-to-face visitation periods per week of at least 20 minutes duration each.
26. Like adoption of new rules by a State agency in Texas, amendment of an existing rule
legally requires adherence to the strictures on promulgation contained in the Texas
Administrative Procedure Act, Tex.Gov. Code, Title 10, Chapter 2001.
27. Once adopted, valid rules of administrative agencies, including rules such as Section
291.4 adopted by Defendant TCJS, have the same force and effect of legislation enacted
by the Texas Legislature.
28. Under Texas law, Defendant TCJS is bound by its own validly adopted rules, including
Section 291.4; its failure to follow the clear, unambiguous language of Section 291.4, as
it was properly promulgated, adopted and made effective on December 27, 1994,
constitutes an arbitrary and capricious illegal act under Texas law; and its approval of
Defendant Denton Countys revised jail visitation plan, which entirely eliminates all inperson or face-to-face visitation between inmates confined at the Denton County Jail
and their respective family members and friends, violates Section 291.4, and is therefore
unlawful.
29. Defendants Denton County and Travis are legally bound by Section 291.4, and their noncompliance with Section 291.4 is subject to judicial intervention in the form of: a) an
order granting a temporary restraining order; b) an order granting a temporary injunction;

and c) an order and final judgment granting a permanent injunction that compels their
compliance with Section 291.4.
30. As a provider of services regulated by Defendant TCJS, and by entering into its contract
with Defendants Denton County and Travis to eliminate face-to-face jail visitation
between Denton county inmates and their family members and friends, Defendant
Securus rendered itself, as a contractual co-conspirator to commit an illegal act, legally
bound by Section 291.4; and its willful non-compliance with Section 291.4 is subject to
judicial intervention in the form of: a) an order granting a temporary restraining order; b)
an order granting a temporary injunction; and c) an order and final judgment granting a
permanent injunction, each of which would prohibit it from in any manner interfering
with Defendant Denton Countys compliance with Section 291.4.
JURY DEMAND
The Plaintiff asserts his right to a trial by jury under Article I, Section 15 of the
Constitution of the State of Texas, and makes this demand for a jury trial at least 30 days prior to
the date the case is set for trial. The Plaintiff has tendered to the Clerk payment of the jury fee
required by applicable Texas law and the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays this Court will:
31. Cause citation to be issued by the Clerk directing all Defendants to appear and answer
this petition;
32. Issue a temporary restraining order which compels Defendant Denton County and
Defendant Travis, their agents, successors, assigns, or anyone acting in concert with
them, to restore in-person or face-to-face visits between inmates confined at the

Denton County Jail and their respective family members and friends, as such visitation
existed prior to December of 2014;
33. Issue a temporary injunction which compels Defendant Denton County and Defendant
Travis, their agents, successors, assigns, or anyone acting in concert with them, to restore
in-person or face-to-face visits between inmates confined at the Denton County Jail
and their respective family members and friends, as such visitation existed prior to
December of 2014, until final judgment or further order in this cause;
34. After further proceedings if necessary, enter a Declaratory Judgment pursuant to Chapter
37 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, finding that operation of the Denton
County Jail does not comply with Title 37, Texas Administrative Code, Section 291.4;
35. Enter a permanent injunction pursuant to Section 65.011 of the Texas Civil Practice and
Remedies Code which compels Defendant Denton County and Defendant Travis, their
agents, successors, assigns, or anyone acting in concert with them, to restore in-person
or face-to-face visits between inmates confined at the Denton County Jail and their
respective family members and friends, as such visitation existed prior to December of
2014;
36. Enter a permanent injunction pursuant to Section 65.011 of the Texas Civil Practice and
Remedies Code which prohibits Defendant Securus from in any manner interfering with
Defendant Denton Countys compliance with Section 291.4, and specifically, the
restoration of in-person or face-to-face visits between inmates confined at the Denton
County Jail and their respective family members and friends, as such visitation existed
prior to December of 2014;

10

37. Award Plaintiff his reasonable costs and attorneys fees, pursuant to Section 37.009 of
the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which are shown to have been necessarily
incurred by Plaintiff in prosecuting this matter; and
38. Grant Plaintiff any additional or further relief to which he may show himself entitled.
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Richard Gladden

Texas Bar No.07991330
Attorney for Plaintiff
Law Office of Richard Gladden
1411 North Elm Street
Denton, Texas 76201
940/323-9307 (voice)
940/312-6830 (fax)
richscot1@hotmail.com (email)

11