February 13, 1975
The Honorable Mark W. White Opinion No. H- 526
Secretary of State
Capitol Building Re: Whether any retired
Austin, Texas 78711 judge is required to
file activities report
under art. 6252-9b,
Dear Secretary White: v. T. c. s.
You have requested our opinion concerning whether retired judges
must comply with the financial disclosure provisions of article 6252-9b.
V. T. C. S.
Section 3(a) of article 6252-9b requires “every elected officer.” to
file financial statements. Section 2(2)(c) defines “elected officer” in
part as “a judge of a court of civil appeals, a district court, a court of
domestic relations, or a juvenile court created by special law,” as does
section 2(2)(E) concerning persons “appointed to fill a vacancy OCR newly
created office who, if elected rather than appointed, would be an elec-
tive officer as defined [above]. ”
Section 1 of the Act provides:
It is the policy of the State of Texas that no
state officer or state employee shall have any
interest, financial or otherwise, direct or in-
direct, or engage in any business transaction
or professional activity or incur any obliga-
tion of any nature which is in substantial con-
flict with the proper discharge of his duties in
the public interest. To implement this policy
and to strengthen the faith and confi,dence of
the people of ‘Texas in their state government,
there are provided standards of conduct and
disclosure requirements to be observed by
persons owing a responsibility to the people of
p. 2372
. -
The Honorable Mark W. White, page 2 (H-526)
Texas and the government of the State of Texas
in the performance of their official duties. It
is the intent of the legislature that this Act shall
serve not only as a guide for official conduct of
these covered persons but also as a basis for
discipline of those who refuse to abide by its
terms.
Section 7 of article 6228b, V. T. C. S., provides in part:
No person who has heretofore retired under
the provisions of this Judicial Retirement Act
shall be considered to have been a judicial officer
of this State after such retirement, unless such
person has accepted an assignment by the Chief
Justice to sit in a court of this state.
Section 7A(a) of article 622813 provides:
Any person who has retired under the pro-
visions of this Judicial Retirement Act and who
within ninety (90) days after such retirement
accepts an assignment by the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court or by a Presiditlg Judge of
an Administrative Judicial Di,strict shall con-
tinue as a judici,al officer, in which instance
he shall, with his own consent to each assign-
ment, be subject to assignment by the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court or by a Presiding
Judge of any Administrative Judicial District
to sit in any court of this state of the same dig-
nity, or lesser, as that from which he retired,
and if in a District Court, under the same rules
as provided by the present Administrati.ve Judi-
cial Act, and while so assigtxd. shall have all the
powers of a judge thereof. While assigned to
said court, such person shall be paid &I amount
equal to the salary of the judge of said court, in
lieu of retirement allowance.
p. 2373
-’
The Honorable Mark W. White, page 3 (H-526)
It is therefore apparent that a judge who retires and does not
accept an appointment to sit in a court of this State is not thereafter
a judicial officer, and has no further duties as a judge. Accordingly,
it is our opinion that those retired judges who are no longer “judicial
officers” within section 7 of article 6228b are also not “elected officers”
under section 2(2) of article 6252-9b and are not subject to its disclosure
requirements. Of course, were a retired judge to scce~pt an executive
or legislative office in state government he may be subject to the
statutory financial disclosure requirements. -See Attorney General
Opinion H-155 (1973).
However, those judges who continue as judicial officers retain
duties as judges, and the public policy of the State, as expressed in
section 1 of 6252-9b, ES, is applicable to the “discharge of [their]
duties.” Attorney General Opinion H-190 (1973) held, paraphrasing the
language of the statute, that:
The courts whose judges are included by
$2(2)(C) in the definition of ‘Elected officers, ’
therefore, are the courts of civil appeals,
district cmn+s. criminal district courts exer-
cising the jurisdi.ction of district courts,
courts of domestic relations, juvenile courts
created by special laws, and any other legis-
latively created courts, if there are any, which
exercise district court jurisdiction. :
A judge who served in one of these courts prior to his retirement,would
therefore have been an “elected officer” during his term of office.
Since upon accep&g assignment to a court under section 7A of article
6228b.a retired judge retains his character as a judicial officer, it is
our opinion that insofar as a rettred judge serves on one of the c~ourts
enumerated in H-190 (1973). supra. he comes wi.thin the broad definition
of “rkcted offi,cer” under secti.on 2(2) of article 6252-913, and in con-
formity with t,he St,ate’s public policy is subject to the Act’s financial
reporti.ng requirements.
p. 2374
. . -
The Honorable Mark W. White, page 4 (H-526)
SUMMARY
A retired judge who does not accept assignment
under section 7A of article 6228b is not an “elected
officer” under article 6252-9b and is not required
to file financial reports.
A retired judge who accepts assignment under
section 7A of article 5228b to one of the courts
covered by section 2(2) of article 6252-9b, is an
“elected officer” and must comply with that statute’s
financial disclosure requirements.
Very truly yours,
HILL
General of Texas
APPROVED:
DAVID M. KENDALL, Fi.rst Assistant
a
C. ROBERT HEAT:H. Chai.rman
Opinion Committee
p. 2375