Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

November 20, 1951 Hon. A. W. Walker ODinion No. v-1350. County Attorney Dickens County Re: Several questions regarding Dickens, Texas the proper authoritiesto maintain en action to re- cover funds q isapproprieted by a coordinatorof 8 coun- ty veteranat vocetional Dear Sir: school. Your letter states in substance as follows: The board of county school trustee,g ba- lieves,that a former coordinatorof the coun- ty~vocatlonalschools (veterans' schools) has misappropriatedsome of the school money. The board has voted to sue the coordinator and his bondsman for the sum of misappropri- ated funds. Pursuant thereto, a member of that board requested you to represent the board In such civil suit in your capacltg as county attorney. You express the opinion that you, in your capacity as county attorney, are not re- quired to represent the county school board in this matter. You submit the following questions for an opinion of this office: 1. Is the county attorney required to represent the Board of County School Trustees of his county In a suit to recover funds al- leged to have been mlsap ropriated by a form- er coordinator (employeeP of veterans' voca- tional schools of such county which are au- thorized and operated under Article 2683Q, V.C.S.? 2. Is the Attorney General of Texas re- quired to represent a county school board in this type of suit? Hon. A. W. Walker, page 2 (v-1350) 3. Does the Board of County School Trustees, itself, have the authority to maintain the suit indicated? Article 2683b, V.C.S., provides as follows: "Sec. 2. The county school trustees of every county in the State of Texas are hereby authorized to maintain, operate and administer special schools in their respec- tive counties and establish classes therein for the education and vocational training of veterans of World War II and also for any other educational benefits which may be provided by law for such veterans, all such schools and classes to be conducted under the jurisdiction and supervision of the re- spective county school boards in their re- spective counties. . . .' "Sec. 3. The State Board for Vocation- al Education is hereby authorized to allo- cate and pay to the respective county boards of trustees of the respective counties in this state, snd such county trustees are hereby authorized te receive, such money ss well as any private donations male for t'he same purpose and shall stand cl~~i~;ed with the power and duty to maintain, oper:?teand administer the same for tilepurposes above stated. "Sec. 4. The county school trustees are authorized to employ instructors, as they may deem necessary, and to do and per- form all things which they deem proper for the successfu.1operation of such schools, and pay for all such by warrants drswn on funds received by them for the purpose." Attorney General's Opinion V-759 (1943) points out that the costs for the operation of the "special schools" authorized by that law sre paid by the State Board of Vocational Education to county boards of trus- tees operating such schools out of Federal funds re- ceived by the State Board in accordance with a State plan and contract adopted by the Board and the Veterans Administration. The Federal funds so received and placed Hon. A. W. Walker, Page 3 (V-1350). in the State Treasury have been appropriated 'tothe specific purpose authorized by the Government. The State Board of Vocational Education, acting under Sec- tion 3 of Article 2683b, allocates and authorize8 to be paid to each respective county board of trustees budgeted amounts needed for thFs program. A State warrant in lump sum for approved amounts is forwarded to participating county boards, which J.nturn draw warrants on these funds received and deposited by them for this purpose. Sec. 4, Art. 268313,V.C.S. ArtFcle 2683 provides in part as follows: "The county school trustees of each county shall constitute a body corporate, by the name of the county school trustee8 Of County, State of Texas, and in that name mas acquire land hold real and personal property, sue and be,sued, and may receive bequests and doII.ati.On8 or other moneys or funds coming legally into their hands, and may perform ot'heracts for the promotion of education in the county. . . ." The genera1 authority oT a c&ntg attorney, illsofaraa civil actions are concerned, is derived from the Constitution and statutes of this State. Section 21 of Article V of the Constitution provides as follows: I, . . The county nttortieys sixoIl Ine- present the State in all cases in the Dis- trict and inferior courts in their respec- tive counties;. . .' The principal purpose of this constitutional provision creating the office of county attorney was to make its main function the Drosecution of criminal cases. Bredy v. Brooks, 99 Tex. 366, 89 S.W. 1052 (1905); 15 Tex. Jur. 395, Dlstrlct and Prosecuting Attorneys, Sec. 11. This provision has been construed as not prescribing any duties for county attorneys other than such 88 are required to be performed for the State. Spencer v. Galveston County, 56 Tex. 384 (1882). Nor does it give to the county attorney authority to Lnsti- tute a proceeding unless he is given that power by stat;u",e.Wexler v. State, 241 S.IJ.231 (Tex. Civ. App. 1922); Chicago, R.I. & G. Ry. Co. v. State, 264 S.W. 127 (Tex. Civ. App. 1924). Hon. A. W. Walker, page 4 (V-1350) But the Legislature has, from time to time, conferred additional duties upon the county attorneys. The statutes governing county attorneys generally and providing for their duties are Articles 329-341, V.C.S. In your letter you refer to Articles 334 and 339, V.C.S. Article 334 provides that district and county attorneys shall advise and give opinions to the various county and precinct officers. But this statute does not require a county attorney to file a civil suit for a county school board, nor does it mean that the county attorney has the right to represent the county or its county school board in all such suits. Att'y Gen. Op. a-3656 (1941). Article 339 provides that when it comes to the knowledge of any district or county attorney that any officer in his district or county entrusted with the collection or safekeeping of any public fund8 is neg- lecting or abusing the trust confided in him or is fail- ing to discharge his duties under the law, he shall in- stitute such proceeding8 as are necessary to compel the performance of such duties and to preserve and protect the public interests. Eut it is clear, in the light of the provisions of Articles 2683 and 268313,that a co- ordinator, an employee of w county veterans' school, is not a county officer entrusted with the collection or safekeeping of any public funds of such s&ecisl schools of the county, within the meaning of Article 339. See Looscan v. Harris Count& 58 Tex. 511 (l%%); Ee:.:ar County v. Davis, 223 S. 1. 558 (Tex. Civ. P3$p.m, error ref.mt'y Gen. Ops. O&r,34 (1945) 3113 v-759, supra. While there are other statutes which authorize suit by the county attorney in particular cases, as for example, Article 6716, V.CS. (damages to public roads), we find no statutory authority or directicn for his rep- resenting the county school board in civil proceedings of the nature involved in your fact situation. Accord- ingly, we agree that you may not properly bring the suit mentioned on your own initiative as county attorney, nor does the law require you to institute such suit as coun- ty attorney at the request of the county school board. See Att'y Gen. Op. O-225 (1939). Section 22 of Article IV of the Texas Consti- tution contains the following provision with reference to the Attorney General: . ,Bon.A. W. Walker, Page 5 (v-1350) * "He shell represent the Stats in 011 suits end pleas in the Supreme Court of the State in uhioh the State may be 8 party . . . end perform such other duties ~8 aey by law.” be 7?equii-0a We have been unable to find any provision in the~lews applicableto the office of Attorney General which authorizes or requires that officer to represent the 254 county school boards of this State Ln civil suits of the nature involved in the submltted fact sit- uation. In vFew of the provlslon of Article 2683, hereinabovequoted, which constitutesthe county school board e body corporate end vests it .withthe power to sue or be sued in that capacity, it is our opinion thet the county school board Ftaelf would have authority to meintaln the suit lndlceted and to emolw an attorney to represent the board. See Arrin@oh v: Jones, lql- S.W. 361 (Tex. Civ. App. 1 17): Steuert v. Newton In- endent School Dist., 13z S.W.2d 429 (Tex. Clv. App. 9). Loerd v. Como, 137 S.W.2d 880 (Tex. Civ. App. 0,'erromndependent School District No. 1 v. Common school District No. 1, 55 P.2a 144 (Idaho Sup. 936). , Neither a county attorney nor the Attor- ney General 1s required or authorized by law to institute a civil suit at the request of a county school board against a coordinatorof special veterans' vocational schools of the county for recovery of school funds allocated ' to and received by the county board under ar- tlcle 2783b, V.C.S., and subsequentlymisap- propriated by the coordinator. Under Article 2783, V.C.S., the county school board itself may mefntaLn such a suit against the coordi- nator and his bondsman, and may employ an at- torney in Its behalf. APPROVRD: Yours very truly, 'J.C. Davis, Jr. PRICE DANIEL County Affair8 Dlvlslon Attorney General Jesse 9. Luton, Jr. Reviewing Assistant By&-= fcb- Chester E. Ollison gw%:i*t:"ws : Assistant CRO:wh