← Election Series · Down-ballot coverage · Texas

Endorses Gunn

The race

Place 4 on the First Court of Appeals — a special election for the unexpired term, November 3, 2026. The First Court of Appeals, sitting in Houston, hears civil and criminal appeals from trial courts in its multi-county Houston-area district. Verified roster: David Gunn (R), the appointed incumbent, vs. Julie Countiss (D).

David Gunn — Incumbent. Appointed by Abbott on September 3, 2024, to the seat April Farris vacated for the Fifteenth Court. Gunn is board certified in appellate law with 35+ years of practice: partner at Beck Redden LLP (previously Hogan Dubose & Townsend and Rothenberg & Gunn), a clerkship on the Fourteenth Court of Appeals, briefs in hundreds of appeals, and more than 25 arguments in the Texas Supreme Court. Peers describe him as one of the state's foremost appellate lawyers; he serves on the Texas Pattern Jury Charges business committee and previously served as a Hilshire Village city councilmember. The AWA — which endorsed Democrats across most Houston races — endorsed Gunn. Dirt check: no discipline found; his bench tenure is two years, and his record as a judge is still thin next to his record as an advocate.

Julie Countiss — Challenger. A sitting justice on this same court, elected in 2018, now seeking the Place 4 unexpired term; if she wins, the Governor appoints her replacement in her current seat. Before the bench she was a Harris County Attorney's Office lawyer focused on shutting down illicit, dangerous businesses. In 2022 the Houston Chronicle's endorsement coverage credited her with four years of appellate experience, a collegial working style, and the outgoing Republican chief justice's mentorship in court administration. Dirt check: no discipline found; no documented restraint or break record was retrieved — her file is administrative competence and collegiality.

Pros and cons

Gunn: Pros: The deepest appellate-advocacy record in any Houston race this cycle; board certification; cross-aisle AWA endorsement; pattern-jury-charge service (the unglamorous work of making law usable). Cons: Two years as a judge; appointed path; a business-defense practice background voters will weigh. Countiss: Pros: Eight years on this court; court-administration preparation; a nuisance-business enforcement record as a county lawyer. Cons: A seat-switch candidacy that hands her current seat to a gubernatorial appointment; no philosophy record retrieved.

OUR CALL

Our call: endorse David Gunn. Both candidates can do the job; the ledger decides it. Gunn brings the appellate craft this court exists for — hundreds of appeals, 25-plus Supreme Court arguments, board certification — plus an endorsement from a screening body that otherwise backed his opponents' party. Countiss's service is credited in full; it does not outrank that file, and her move's side effect (an appointed successor in her old seat) counts against the switch, not for it.

Vote Gunn.

For the complete Election 2026 breakdown — every race, claim by claim — see the full coverage on our website.

Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same.

Sources

Election result — November 4, 2026

Result pending. No verified call (Associated Press or official) as of November 4, 2026. This page will be updated when the race is called or certified. The original article above is unchanged.

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Full down-ballot enumeration