Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

July 31, 1964 Hon. Clyde E.. Smith, Jr. Opinion NO. c-,288 County Attorney Tyler County so Re: Whether, under Sec. 6, Woodville,,.Texas ,' particle 4494 -10, V.C.S. (W.B, 781, 58th Leg.), the Commlseloners Court should follow the rule under Article 4479, V.C.S. and appoint hospital man- Dear Mr. Smith: agers for overlapping terms. You have requested a construction of Section 6, Article &494q-10, Vernon's Civil Statutes (House Bill 781, 58th Legislature), with reference to Article, 4479, Vernon’s Civil Statutes. Article 4494q-10 Is a s ecial law creating a Tyler County Hospital District. Section ii thereof states in part as follows: "The Commissioners Court shall appoint a Board of Hospital Managers, consisting of six (6) members, who shall serve for a term of two (2) ye$rs with overlappi desired . . . Article 4479 ,ls part of a general law authorizing the c~ommissioners court of any county to establish a county hospi- tal, and reads In part as, follower .the commlasioners'~court shall .aipoint six resident property taxpaying El&ens of the county who sha.11 constitute a board of managers of said hospital. The term of office of each member of said board shall be two years, except that In making the first appointments after this Act takes ef- feet three,members shall be appointed for one year and three members for two years so that thereafter three members of said boaf;d will be ,appointed every two years. . . . -1378- Hon. Clyde E. Smith, Jr., page 2 (c-288) Under the special law passed for Tyler County, a hospital district is being set up and your question is: flMust the Commissioners Court follow the overlapping term provision of the general law in making Its first appointments?” The rule for construing general and special laws together Is stated In 53 Tex.Jur.2d 232, Statutes, 8 161, as follows: “In case of conflict between a general provision and a special provision dealing with the same subject, the former Is control- led or limited by the latter, since a specific statute more clearly evidences the intention of the legislature than a general one; and this Is so whether the ~provisions in question are con- tained in the same act or In different enact- ments. . . .” In the case of Hidalga County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 v. ‘Hldalgo County 134 S W 26 464 TTex.Civ.App. 1939, error ref.), it is said it page.467: 11 . .when specific provisions of the generai law, if given effect, would nullify or modify specific provisions of the special act concerning particularized rights and duties of the districts created by it, the latter pro- visions must prevail over those of the general law. . ..‘I In the case of Road District No. 1, Jefferson County, v. Sellers, 142 Tex. 528,Tsb S.W.m44) , one of th auesti ons before the court was which act governed where a especial iaw for Jefferson County provided that bonds therein referred to should be payable at such time as,might be deemed most expedient by the Commissioners Court; whereas the general law provided that generally bonds of the same category should be redeemable at the pleasure of the county, but not until five years after the issuance of the bonds. In holding that the special law governed, the Court said ,at page 141 , in a unanimous ,declsion: “An examination of the two statutes will disclose that ~the Legislature in the enactment of the /ETpecialT statute under which these bonds were’ is-med an?f conferred on the Commissioners’ Court full and unlimited power to make the bonds payable at such time or times as may be deemed expedient. , .whereas no such unlimited authority -1379- Hon. Clyde E. Smith, Jr., page 3 (c-288) was granted to the Commissioners' Court under the provisions of Article 720 /%e general statute7 . , .In our opinion there is such conflizt between the two provisions that we would not be justified in holding that the provisions of Article 720 are a licable to the bonds issued under the -speciai7act Pp here under consideration." Under the rules of construction set forth above, the special statute under which the Tyler County Hospital District is being set up does not restrict the Hospital Managers to overlapping terms and such special statute is controlling. .SUMMARY The Commissioners Court of Tyler County ma elect under the terms of Section 6, Article 449 $ q-10, Vernon's Civil,Statutes, whether or not it shall ap- point Hospital Managers with overlapping terms in the Tyler County Hospital District. Yours very truly, WAGGONER CARR Attorney General LCjr:ms:mkh Assist&t APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman W. E. Allen Arthur Ssndlin Larry Merrlman Harry Gee APPROVEDFOR THE ATTORNEX GENERAL BY: Stanton Stone -1380-