Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

November 9, 1965 Hon. R. Wplght Armstrong Oplnlon No. C340 Chairman, Board of Directors Texas ~Technologlcal Colleges. Re: Whether, under the facts 5803 El Camp0 'Terrace aubmltted, a student is Fort Worth, Texas 76107 properly classified as 'resident" ur "non+=esl- dent" for tuition purposes under Article 265&b, over- Dear Mr. Armstrong: non% Civil Statutes. You 'have requested the opinion of this office on the above ~questlon. In this connection, you have furnished ua with the following facts: "Ilse student in question Is a school teacher, having tau t school In the State of ~Texas for 'SIX (6T years. Last ~year, she went to Qermany to teach in a service school and for the purpose of touring Germany, all as part of her further educationas a teacher. She 'was out of the State of Texas on this tem- porary tour ten (10) months. She returned to Lame,sa, Texas, on July 2, 1965. She registered at Texas Technological College on September 14, 1965, and was ruled to be a non-resident for the purpose of paying tuition rates as provided in Article !2654c, Vernon's Civil Statutes. The student has lived In Texas during her entire life and for the past 28 years has been a resident of Dawson County, Texas. She is a qualified voter of Dawson County, Texas, and voted in thatcounty last year as an absentee voter. The following pertinent portions ol Article 26540, Vernon's Civil Statutes.are quoted: -2583- Hon. R. Wright Armstrong, page 2 (C- 540) “Section l(e) . The term ‘residence’ as used In this Act means ‘domicile’; the term ‘resided In’ means ‘domiciled In’; provided, the Qoverning Board of each institution re- quired under this Act to charge a nonresident registration fee Is hereby authorized and directed to follow such rules, regulations and interpretations as are issued by the Commission on Higher Education for the effec- tive and uniform administration of the non-~,,.. resident tuition ‘provisions of this Act. .. Any such. rules, regulations,. and Interpreta-’ tlons’as may be issued by said Commlss.lon shall .also, be, furnished to the presidents or ,:. ” executive .heada of public junior colleges In this state. ,For the purposes of this Act, the status of a student as a ‘resident’ or ‘non-resident 1 student, is to be determined ,, ,. as follows: 5 .(I) A nonresident student $8 hereby de- fined to be a student of less than twenty-one I Lg!Z,) ;;arse~sa~;. . .; or a student of twenty- Y age or over who resldes out of,the state or who has not been a resident of the state ,twelve (,12) months immediately .precedlx the .date of ~reglstratlon. *’ (Emphasis ,supplled) The Texas Commission on Higher Education has issued Its rules snd regulations lnterpretlng.the, non,-resident tuition provisions of the:‘above-quoted statute. These rules do not, however, provide any real assistance in tha’determinatlon of the question before ,us.. We must, therefore, ~turn to other sources for our solution. The term “domicile” may have, a variety of slgnlflcatlons, dependent on its various applications. “What has been said to be the most comprehensive and correct definition which could be given ie that, in a strict legal sense, the domicile of a person la the place where he has his true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, and to,,whlch, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning. 28 C.J.S.~ 3 DOMICILE, 8 1. Also, “temporary residence, even. if long, merely for the purpose of transacting business or of engaging In employment, or for the sake of health or pleasure, with the Intention of returning to the original home, is not sufficient for the acquisition or 28 C.J.S. 19, S 11,. See also Peaoock vs. %%%a~~ %:‘%‘68, 194 S.W.2d 551 (1946), wherein it is -2584- Hon. Ft. Wright Armstrong, page 3 (C- 540) stated, at page 555, "A domicile which has once attached is retained until a new domicile 1s attained.* i. . .Before a change of domicile of an adult can be effected there must exist both the fact of personal presence Inkhe new place and the intention to make that new place a~home. We turn now to the problem of applylng,the statutes and legal Interpretations to the facts of the caseat hand. The student here Involved is a native Texan, and under the facts given, her domicile has been in pawson~County,,Texas, all her life. Her absence from this State, ~apparently from September, 1964 to July, 1965, was pursuant to a teaching contract with an armed forces sohool in Germany, and for the purpose of touring Germany, all as part of her further eduoa- tlon as a teacher. Luring her absence from Texas she paid her poll tax and, voted absentee In Dawson County, Texas. Upon the expiration of her teaching contract and tour of Germany, she returned to Lawson County. It 1s the opinion of this office that the foregoing facts constitute no basis for di- vesting the student of her established domicile in Texas. On the basls of the facts submitted by you, it 1s the opfnlon oft this office that the student in question re- talned her BomlciIe l,n Texas and Is entitled to be charged resident tultlon~ rates under Art,lcle 2654~~ Vernon's Civil Statutes. SGM'MARY When a resident of Texas leaves the State under an armed forces teaching contract, and stays in Ger- many for the contract period, with the Intention of returning to his domicile In Texas, and returns to Texas upon the expiration of his contract, he has not relinquished his domicile in Texas. Such a oereon. under these facts. Is a resident of Texas for purposes of college tuition under Article 26540, V.C.S. Very truly yours, WAGGONER CAHH Attorney General Assistant MLQ:ms:mkh -2k85- Hon. R. Wright Armstrong, page 4 (C-540) APPROVED: OPINIONCOMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman Marietta., Payne Wade Anderson John Reeves Terry Goodman APPROVEDFORTHE ATTORrJEy GENERAL BY: T. B. Wright -2586-