Texas Bar Journal • May 2026

Disciplinary Actions

JUDICIAL ACTION
To read the entire public s anctions, go to scjc.texas.gov.

On March 9, 2026, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct issued a public reprimand and order of additional education to JARED SHAW, justice of the peace, Precinct 1, Floresville, Wilson County.

DISBARMENT

On March 6, 2026, JAMES BRUCE HARRIS [#24026926], of Wichita Falls, was disbarred. An evidentiary panel of the District 14 Grievance Committee found that on August 1, 2017, the complainant hired Harris for representation in a criminal matter. The complainant paid $20,000 for the representation. The complainant filed his complaint in this grievance matter on December 19, 2023. The four-year statute of limitations applicable in this case thus began to run on December 19, 2019. From December 19, 2019, until the date that new counsel was appointed on the underlying criminal case, October 11, 2022, Harris remained counsel of record for the complainant. During that period, Harris neglected to perform work on the criminal matter. Harris also failed to provide the complainant with case information and failed to communicate with him to the extent reasonably necessary to permit him to make informed decisions about the representation. Upon termination of representation, Harris failed to refund unearned fees. Furthermore, Harris failed to respond to the grievance.

Harris violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.03(b), 1.16(d), and 8.04(a)(8). He was ordered to pay $10,000 in restitution and $1,175 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.

SUSPENSIONS

On February 24, 2026, JASON JOHN JAKOB [#24042933], of San Antonio, accepted a five-year fully probated suspension effective March 1, 2026. An evidentiary panel of the District 10 Grievance Committee found that Jakob failed to explain the matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit his client to make informed decisions regarding the representation, failed to hold client funds separate from his own property, failed to promptly notify the client of the receipt of funds, failed to promptly deliver client funds that the client was entitled to receive, and failed to keep disputed funds separate until the dispute was resolved.

Jakob violated Rules 1.03(b), 1.14(a), 1.14(b), 1.14(c), and 8.04(a) (1). He agreed to pay $1,236.50 in restitution and $2,500 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.

On February 25, 2026, JOSEPH B. GARZA [#07734000], of Dallas, agreed to a 12-month probated suspension beginning March 1, 2026, and ending February 28, 2027. An evidentiary panel of the District 6 Grievance Committee found that the complainant hired Garza in or about March 2023 in her capacity as a trustee in a matter involving a revocable living trust. Garza failed to explain the matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the complainant to make informed decisions regarding the representation. Garza charged and collected an unconscionable fee from the complainant. Garza failed to hold funds belonging to the complainant, acting in her capacity as trustee of the revocable living trust, that were in Garza’s possession in connection with the representation, separate from Garza’s own property. Upon request by the complainant, Garza failed to promptly render a full accounting regarding the funds. Upon termination of representation, Garza failed to surrender papers and property to which the complainant was entitled and failed to refund advance payments of fees that had not been earned.

Garza violated Rules 1.03(b), 1.04(a), 1.14(a), 1.14(b), and 1.16(d). He was ordered to pay $17,000 in restitution and $7,212.55 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND

On October 17, 2025, LAUREN CADILAC [#24078990], of Dallas, received a judgment of public reprimand. The 468th District Court of Collin County found that Cadilac committed professional misconduct by violating Rule 1.03(a) [A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information].

Cadilac was ordered to pay $2,280 in restitution.

PRIVATE REPRIMANDS

Listed here is a breakdown of Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct violations for five attorneys, with the number in parentheses
indicating the frequency of the violation. Please note that an attorney may be reprimanded for more than one rule violation.

1.01(b)(1)—In representing a client, a lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to the lawyer (2). 1.01(b)(2)—In representing a
client, a lawyer shall not frequently fail to carry out completely the obligations that the lawyer owes to a client or clients (1).

1.03(a)—A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information (2).

1.15(a)—Failing to hold funds and other property belonging in whole or part to clients or third persons in a lawyer’s possession separate from the lawyer’s own property (2).

1.16(d)—Upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client’s interests, such as giving reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and property to which the client is entitled, and refunding any advance payments of fees that have not been earned. The lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to the extent permitted by other law only if such retention will not prejudice the client in the subject matter of the representation (1).

3.04(a)—A lawyer shall not unlawfully obstruct another party’s access to evidence; in anticipation of a dispute unlawfully alter, destroy, or conceal a document or other material that a competent lawyer would believe has potential or actual evidentiary value; or counsel or assist another person to do any such act (1).

3.04(c)(5)—A lawyer shall not, except as stated in paragraph (d), in representing a client before a tribunal, engage in conduct intended to disrupt the proceedings (1).