TEXAS
April 9, 1952
Hon. John F. May Opinion No. V-~1432
District Attorney
81st Judicial District Re: Obligation of Wilson
Karnes City, Texas County to pay its pro
rata share of the sal-
ary of the district
attorney's stenographer
when the commissioners
courts of the other four
counties in the judicial
district have approved
the stenographer's em-
ployment and salary
Dear Sir: rate.
Your request for our opinlon reads in
part as follows:
"I am District Attorney of the 81st
Judicial District, which is comprised of
fl~ve counties, namely, Atascosa, Frlo,
Karnes, La Salle, and Wilson. Under the
provisions of Revised Civil Statutes, Ar-
ticle 326k-19, passed by the last legis-
lature, I am desirous of employing a ste-
nographer, and have submitted to the com-
missioners courts of each of these counties
a request to approve a salary for such ste-
nographer to be paid the sum of $2400.00
per annum as provided In said article.
The Commissioners Courts of four of the
counties comprising this district, namely,
Atascosa, Frio, Karnes, and La Salle, have
each given their approval of the employ-
ment of a stenographer at a salary of
$2400.00 per annum, each county agreeing
to pay Its pro-rata part according to the
population of such counties. The commis-
sioners court of the other county In this
district, namely, Wilson County, has de-
clined to give their approval of such sal-
ary.
Hone John F. May, page 2 (V-1432)
“Under the foregoing facts, I wish to
obtain your ruling upon the following:
“(1) May I employ a stenographer
without securing the approval of the com-
missioners court of Wilson County?
“(2) If I may employ a stenographer,
what salary may be paid such stenographer?
“(3) If I may employ a stenographer,
will the Commissioners Court of Wilson
Co,unty be authorized and required to Issue
monthly checks for the pro-rata share of
such salary apportioned to Wilson County
according to population?”
Article 326k-19, V.C.S., provides:
“Any district attorney in the State
of Texas in ,a judicial district containing
two (2) or more counties is authorized to
employ a stenographer or clerk who shall
receive a salary not to exceed Twenty-four
Hundred ($2,400.00) Dollars per annum, to
be fixed by the district attorney and ap-
proved by the combined majority of the
Commissioners Co,urts of the. counties com-
posing his judicial district. The salary
of such stenographer or clerk provided
for in this Act shall b p Id monthly by
the Commissioners Courteofaeach county
composing the judicial district, pro-rated
pportionately to th population of the
bounty.” (Emphasis Edded.)
The act clearly authorizes the,District
Attorney of the 81st Judicial District to employ
a stenographer. It also provides that the stenog-
rapher shall receive an annual salary not to exceed
$2400 per annum which IS “to be fixed by the dls-
trict attorney and approved by the combined majority
of the Commissioners Courts of the counties comprls-
ing his judicial district.”
Since~ four of the five counties’ compris-
ing the 81st Judicial District have approved the
salary of $2400 as fixed by the District Attorney,
. .
Hon. John F. May, page 3 (V-1432)
it is our opinion that this is the salary that may
be paid to the stenographer.
It was held In Attorney General's Opinion
V-1314 (1951) that the provisions of the above act
relating to-the duties of the commissioners' courts
are mandatory. In Opinion V-1338 (1951) it was held
that the commissioners' court of each county in the
judicial district must pay the county's pro rata part
of the salary which has been fixed by the district
attorney and approved by the combined majority of
the commissioners' courts. Accordingly, since a
combined majority of the commissioners' zourts of
the counties comprising the 8lst Judicial District
have approved the salary of $2400.00, it is our
opinion that the underlined portion of the act re-
quires Wilson County to pay its pro rata share of
the salary apportioned to it according to population.
SUMMARY
Article 326k-19, V.C.S., authorizes
the District Attorney of the 8lst Judicial
District to employ a stenographer. Since
the commissioners' courts of four of the
five counties comprising the 81st Judicial
Dlstridt have approved an annual salary of
$2400.00 as fixed by the Distri,ctAttorney
for the stenographer, this is the amount
which should be paid. The act requires
that 'WilsonCounty pay its pro rata share
of the salary apportioned to It according
to population, even though its commlssion-
ers' court has not ap roved the salary.
Att'y Gen. Ops. V-13le, V-1338~ (1951).
Yours very truly,
APPROVED: PRICE DANIEL
Attorney General
J. C. Davis, Jr.
County Affairs Division
Mary K, Wall
Reviewing Assistant By4@&%A&
Assistant
Charles D. Mathews
First Assistant