THE ATTORNEY GEXERAL
OF TEXAS
May 25, 1987
Honorable Rex N. Leach Opinion No. JM-708
District Attorney
200 West State Street Re: Supervisory control of a district
Groesbeck, Texas 76642 court over a county commissioners
court under article V. section 8, of
the Texas Constitution
Dear Mr. Leach:
You ask about the interpretation of article V, section 8, of the
Texas Constitution, which provides:
District Court jurisdiction consists of ex-
clusive, appellate, and original jurisdiction of
all actions, proceedings, and remedies, except in
cases where exclusive, appellate, or original
jurisdiction may be conferred by this Constitution
or other law on some other court, tribunal, or
administrative body. District Court judges shall
have the power to issue writs necessary to enforce
their jurisdiction.
The District Court shall have appellate juris-
diction and general supervisory control over the
County Camissioners Court, with such exceptions
and under such regulations as may be prescribed by
law. (Emphasis added).
-
Specifically, you ask whether a lawsuit must be filed in order to
invoke a district court's "general supervisory control" over a
commissioners court.
Cases interpreting article V, section 8, of the Texas Constitu-
tion make clear that a district court nay exercise "general
supervisory control" over a commissioners court only when the district
court's jurisdiction is properly invoked by the filing of a lawsuit.
In Scott v. Graham, 292 S.W.Zd 324, 328 (Tex. 1956). for example, the
Texas Supreme Court discussed the meaning of article V, section 8.
The court pointed out that although the legislature had established
procedures for appealing orders of comeissioners courts relating to
certain matters, the legislature had not established a procedure for
invoking the general supervisory control of district courts over
actions of commissioners court. The Texas Supreme Court stated,
however, that it was well settled that an equitable proceeding brought
p. 3274
Eonorable Rex N. Leach - Page 2 (JM-708)
in district court for the purpose of reviewing au order of a comis-
sioners court was within the power granted by article V, section 8.
Id. See also County of Rays v. Alexander, 640 S.W.Zd 73, 78 (Tex.
AT. - Austin 1982, no writ); Rarris County v. Bassett, 139 S.W.Zd
180, 182 (Tex. Civ. App. - Galveston 1940, writ ref'd).
A treatise on the Texas Constitution contains the following
discussion of article V, section 8:
Section 8 gives the district court 'appellate
jurisdictioa and general supervisory control' over
the comissionrrs court. . . . [Tlh= 'control'
phrase adds nothing. Indeed, in this provision
the phrase 'general supervisory control' is
demonstrably inaccurate because the district court
does not have any kind of general control over
cowmissioners courts; the courts have held that
the district court may exercise its jurisdiction
over commissioners courts only if a commissioners
court has acted without legal authority or abused
its discretion, and even then it may uot review
actions of the commissioners court unless a
statute provides for such review or unless an
independent equitable action is brought in the
district court. (See Garcia v. State, 290 S.W.2d
555 (Tex. Civ. App.YSan Antonio 1956, writ ref'd
n.r.e.).) This principle was reaffirmed recently
in Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Liberty-Dauville
Fresh Water Supply Dist. No. 1 (506 S.W.Zd 931
(Tex. Civ. App. - Tyler 1974, uo writ)).
1 G. Braden, The Constitution of the State of Texas: An Annotated and
Comparative Analysis 415-16 (1977). We think that this treatise
correctly interpreted the relevant case law and that a district
court's "general supervisory control" over a commissioners court
exists only when the district court's jurisdiction is properly invoked
by the filing of a lawsuit.
SUMMARY
A district court may exercise "general super-
visory contro1" over the actions of a commissioners
court only when a lawsuit is brought in district
court seeking review of the cowmissioners court's
actions.
Jzh
JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas
p. 3275
,
Honorable Rex N. Leach - Page 3 (B-f-708)
JACK HIGHTOWER
First Assistant Attorney General
MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General
JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKL~
Special Assistant Attorney General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee
Prepared by Sarah Woelk
Assistant Attorney General
p. 3276