Press & Media Kit

Proposed — not Texas law The SAFE SAPCR Act is draft legislation. It has not been introduced, has not passed either chamber, and is not in effect. Nothing on this page describes a rule a Texas court applies today.

Everything journalists need to cover Texas family court reform. Download-ready assets, verified facts, and interview contacts.

Last updated: August 26, 2026

Media Contact

Email (preferred) media@safesapcrtx.org
General inquiries info@safesapcrtx.org

There's more to this story.

Secure, encrypted contact for sensitive information.

💬 The Story in One Line

For Headlines & Social

"Texas law allows attorneys to 'serve' custody papers to wrong addresses with zero verification—parents lose their children without ever knowing there was a court case."

📊 Quick Facts

The Problem at a Glance

Drawn from public court records and legal research. Case-study figures describe what the docket shows; whether service was proper is before the court and has not been decided.

0 Verification required before attorneys certify an address
104 Days between personal service at one address and certification of another (case study)
11 Years since both parties had abandoned the certified address
None Specific criminal penalty for filing a false Certificate of Last Known Address. TRCP 13, CPRC ch. 10 and the disciplinary rules can still reach one
6 States the petition has been signed from
16 Texas legislators contacted directly

📥 For Reporters

We will send you the filings directly. Email media@safesapcrtx.org and ask for any document referenced on this site, and you will get it. That is the fastest route to verifying anything here.

You can also pull the record yourself from the Harris County District Clerk — but note that as of August 2026 the clerk requires a free registered account to view Civil and Family case records, which it did not previously. The cause numbers are published on this page and on the case study so you can check every date against the docket.

📝

SAFE SAPCR Act Summary

Key provisions of the proposed legislation with legal citations.

View Online

Legal Background

Texas Rule 239a analysis, constitutional issues, and case law references.

View Analysis
🎨

Logo & Brand Assets

View our logo and brand colors below. Right-click to save images.

View Logos
📰

Press Release

Official press release with full email text as sent to media and advocates.

View Release

💬 Key Talking Points

For Interviews & Articles

  • The Loophole Texas Rule 239a allows attorneys to certify a respondent's "last known address" without any verification requirement. No proof. No documentation. Just their word. This enables service of process to wrong addresses, resulting in default judgments against people who never received notice.
  • Constitutional Violation When parents don't receive notice of custody proceedings, they lose their fundamental constitutional right to be heard before their parental rights are modified. Children are separated from loving parents through paperwork fraud, not evidence.
  • No Remedy, No Accountability The only current remedy is a Bill of Review—an expensive, time-consuming legal proceeding that most affected parents cannot afford. Meanwhile, there's zero penalty for attorneys who file false certificates.
  • The Solution Exists The SAFE SAPCR Act would require mandatory constable service, attorney due diligence certification with documentation, criminal penalties for fraud, and expedited remedies for victims.
  • Bipartisan Issue This isn't partisan. Parents of all backgrounds, political affiliations, and demographics are affected. Everyone agrees that due process and parental rights are fundamental.

📅 Case Timeline (Public Record)

How a Default Custody Judgment Happens Without Notice

Cause No. 202417675, 311th District Court, Harris County. Docket events are taken from the Harris County District Clerk record. Items drawn from the pleadings are labelled as such — those are allegations the court has not ruled on.

March 19, 2024 SAPCR petition filed by counsel for the petitioner in the 312th District Court of Harris County and transferred to the 311th the following morning, supported by the March 19, 2024 affidavit of the petitioner on which the application for a temporary restraining order rested.
April 6, 2024 The respondent is personally served at a Baytown hotel while visiting his children. A restricted docket entry dated April 15, 2024, titled “Citation/Temporary Restraining Order (Executed),” contains the return of service and is the subject of subpoenas duces tecum in the pending Bill of Review.
June 3, 2024 A related habeas matter in the same 311th District Court is set for trial. Citation to the respondent’s actual New Orleans address was requested and never issued; two such requests are in hand, filed December 27, 2023 and January 31, 2024. The court’s own Scheduling Order of March 21, 2024, which set this trial date, was addressed to him at that address. The case is dismissed for want of prosecution on June 4, 2024; the order recites that no party appeared for trial on the merits.
July 19, 2024 A Certificate of Last Known Address is filed under Rule 239a naming an address both parties had abandoned in 2013 — eleven years before the suit. This is 104 days after the respondent was personally served at a different address. Rule 239a requires a written certification but imposes no verification standard.
August 20, 2024 On the basis of that certificate the court authorises service by mail to the address listed, and a default judgment is entered: sole managing conservatorship to the petitioner, the respondent restricted to supervised visitation.
December 27, 2024 Visits between the respondent and the children cease and have not resumed. The pleadings allege the visits in the preceding months were unsupervised, contrary to the order the respondent says he did not know existed.
December 12, 2025 A Bill of Review is filed in the same court seeking to set aside the August 20, 2024 order (Cause No. 202592876). A First Amended Bill of Review followed on July 20, 2026. Trial is set for October 19, 2026. Whether service was proper is the question before the court; it has not been decided.

Read Full Case Study

💬 Quotable Quotes

Quotes for attribution

This press kit previously offered four quotes here “available for attribution”. They were illustrative copy, not statements anyone made, and three of them described a filing as fraudulent — a question that is before the court in Cause No. 202592876 and has not been decided. They have been removed rather than reworded, because a quote a reporter can print has to be one somebody actually said.

For an on-the-record quote, or an interview with the respondent parent in Cause No. 202417675, contact media@safesapcrtx.org.

📰 Story Angles

INVESTIGATIVE

The 239a Loophole

How Texas family law attorneys exploit a procedural gap to obtain custody orders against parents who never knew they were sued.

HUMAN INTEREST

Fighting to Come Home

Parents spending years and life savings to overturn fraudulent default judgments and reunite with their children.

LEGISLATIVE

The SAFE SAPCR Act

Proposed legislation would reform service requirements and add accountability. Who supports it? Who opposes it? Why?

LEGAL ANALYSIS

Due Process in Family Court

Constitutional implications of allowing custody modifications without verified notice. Expert analysis from family law scholars.

COMPARATIVE

How Other States Do It

Texas vs. other states: comparing service of process requirements in custody cases. Who does it better?

SOLUTIONS

Fixing the System

Concrete reforms that would prevent fraud while keeping courts accessible. Technology, process, and accountability changes.

🎨 Logo & Brand Assets

SAFE SAPCR Texas Logo

Please use without modification. Maintain clear space around the logo equal to the height of the "S" in SAFE.

SAFE SAPCR Logo Light background
SAFE SAPCR Logo on dark background Dark background
Primary Navy
#1e3a5f
Action Orange
#e85d04
Accent Gold
#f59e0b

📄 About SAFE SAPCR Texas

Boilerplate (Copy-Ready)

SAFE SAPCR Texas (Service Accountability and Fraud Elimination for Suits Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship) is a Texas legal information project on service of process and default judgments in family court. It was built and is maintained by Scott Allen Willis, a pro se litigant in Harris County who lost conservatorship through a default judgment entered without notice. It advocates for legislative changes that would require verified service, attorney accountability, and expedited remedies. All resources are free.

Its aim is that no parent loses custody of their children through paperwork fraud. SAFE SAPCR Texas is not a law firm and not a registered entity, and does not provide legal advice or representation.

Website: safesapcrtx.org | Email: info@safesapcrtx.org | Media: media@safesapcrtx.org