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-