When a judge is against a party to a case nothing will get in the way of his / her bias.

At a hearing held 10th October 2016 family court judge court 246 Houston hearing a contempt case said an order granted by the court last year was not signed by the defendant and denied the motion on that basis and although the order detailed which party would file taxes for each of two children, the judge claimed that the document was between myself and the Attorney General office and so his signed order was unenforceable. Below are the signatures associated with the motion, clearly showing signatures to the court order to include the Judge, Attorney General and Defendant.

From the above signatures for the court, the attorney General office, the defendant and the judge are on the document instituting the court order. What is more interesting with the judges ruling is the plaintiff and defendant appeared prose and gave testimony under oath in the presence of a court reporter and Judge at court 246. How was the judge able to establish that I had a agreement in some back room with the AG representative and the document signed by the court is unenforceable. If this is not bias to the extreme then the meaning of bias needs to be changed. Court 246 will account for bias shown in rulings at some point. I am calling for a review of similar cases from court 246 Houston Texas.