Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable John E. Winters, Executive Director State Geparlmsnt of Public %lfare Austin 3, Texas bar Sir: Opi.niouKo. O-6074 Re: Tnterprstation of residence requirements for employees of the I;epartmentof Publio ?ie?ffare under the provisions of Section 4 (7) House Bill X~o.611, 47th Legislature, a8 amended by the Acts of the 46th Legislature. This will acknowledge receipt of your letter, which reads, ir part, 85 follows: "Section 4 (7) of I!ouseEill 611, A&s of the 47th Legislature, Regular Session, as amondsd by Acts of the 48th Legislature, Rewlar Session, provides in pert: 801 . a . . provided, however, that all employees of the ?I!epartmentshall have been residents of the State of Texas for a period of at least four (4) years next pm- ceding their appointment. "T% are receiving many applications for employment from persons who have maintained legal residence for voting purposes within the State but who have been absmt frm the State over various periods of time within the last four years.! For oonvenience we regroup your questions as follows: 1. The character of legal residence required for employment with the State %partment of Public Welfare? 2. J?oesthe residence statute, supra, have reference to actual physical presence within the State or may the Public Welfare apartment consider the intent of the prospective employee in determining the nature of his residence? 3. ‘&en n person’s employment has necessitated his travelling over the country with only infrequent visits in Texas, but at all times Honorable John H. Winters, Page 2 O-6074 considered Texas his legal place of residence, paid his poll tax and voted in Texas, would his intention to return be sufficient to establish residence? 4. Would the statement of his intention to return to Texas be sufficient to establish residence ir:the absence of visits, Payne&, of poll tax and voting in Texas, provided he had not claimed the right to vote in 8010sother State? 5. Could the Public Wel~fareDepartment consider that a minor, whose parents are legal residents of the State of Texas, has fu]fillsd the residence requirement when the mirrorhas been absent from the'State continuousl~yattending school or working for the four year period with only infrequent visits with her parents, residence being claimed solely on the basis that she acquired the residence of her parents. 6. If the minor had never actually lived in this State with her parents prior to going to sohool or accepting employment outside the State, would this make any difference in the decision? Generally, where a statute presaribes residence as a qualifi- cation for the enjoyment of a privilege, or the exercise of a fran- chise, and/or whenever the terms are used In connection with subjects of domestic policy, domicile and residence are equivalent, 19 C,J, p0 397, 28 C.J.S. pe 7. And it is our opinion that the Legislature, in enacting this residence statute, had in mind a state public poliay, .theprevention of appointment of transient workers in the &partment of Public Welfare, and further intended residence to mean and be the same as domicile. In a strict and legal sense the domicile of a person is the place where he has his true, fixed and permanent home and principal establishment, and to which, whenever he is absent, he has the inten- tion of returning, or in other language, the place in which he has his fixed habitation, ,withoutany present intection of removing therefromz Elxparte Blumer, 27 Tex. 734 (Quoting Store, Conflict of Laws), It will thus be seen that two things must concur to constitute domicile: First, residence; and second, the intention of making the place of residence one's home, See 16 Tex. Juris. P, 709, with cases cited, While the intention must be constant, it is not necessary that the individual be physically resident continuously at the place in order there to maintain the domiojle after it has once been acquired, actual residenoe is not indispensable to the retaining of a domicile once acquired3 it is retained by the mere intention not to ohange or adopt another. EcIntyre v. Chappel, 4 Tex, 167, 197. And it 1s of no oonse- quenoe how short the residence may have beenl it is the fact of residence, coupled with irtention that establishes the domicile. Republlo vo Young, Dallas, 464. , I Honorable John H. knters, Page 3 O-6074 The foregoing is, in our opinion, in general, the character of legal residence required for employment with the State Espartmant of Public Welfare. i?ithregard to your seaond question, it is our opinion the residenae statute, supra, has referenoe to both an actual physical presenae within the State and intent. He must have established a domicile in Texas. TO do that, 88 stated above, he must actually reside in the State and have an intention to remain, or not to adopt another or, if aaey, to return. If he should leave Texas, a ohange of domicile or residsnoe depends on intention, or, as sometimes stated, on a dual intention to abandon the former domicile (Texas) and to acquire another. Sec. 28 C.J,S. p. 15, 16, with cases cited. Your second question, there- fore, cannot he answered oategoriaally. Your third question in our opinion should be answered in the affirmative. Temporary residence, even if long, merely for the purpose of transacting business or of engaging in employment, with the intention of returning to the original home, is not suffioient for change of domicile. 28 C. J. S., pa 19, with oases cited, The place of exercise of the election franchise is important evidenoe on the question of dom- icileg it may be even the highest widenoe, and has been oalled the most important of all the fonsal acts to be scrutinized in ascertaining a person's domicile. See oases cited, 28 C.J. S. pm 46. His intention to return and not adopt another domicile would be sufficient to estab- lish residenoe. With reference to your fourth question the person in question at all times considered Texas his home, though he did not pay his poll tax or vote here, nor visit here, but did not claim the right to vote in some other State. An established domicile is not lost merely by temporary absence therefrom, or temporary residence elsewhere, however long continued, even for a period of years. A person intending to retain his old domicile, may reside almost indefinitely out of the loous of such domiaile. In re Curtis. 178 N.Y.S. 286, 288. Furthermore, if an in- dividual is shonn to have bean domiciled at a partiauler place, he will be deemed to have retained that domicile unless it is shown affirmatfve- ly that he acquired a residence elsewhere. Sheppard V. Cassiday, 20 Tex. 24, 29, 70 &II.Dec. 372. If his statement of intention to return to Texas was honest, and not made for the purpose of creating widenoe in his favor after he has become appreciative of the consequences of a change of domicile and not made to aonceal another real intention, in our opinion it would establish his domioile as still in Texas, provided he at all times in- tended to return to Texas and had not established a domicile elsewhere. - . Honomble John H. Winters, Page 4 O-6074 IVerestate the facts involved in your fifth question, A minor whose parents are legal residents of 1exas, cleims residence in T.¶x** solely on the basis that she acquired the residence of her parents, This minor has been absent from the State continuously attending school or working for the four year period with only infrequent visits with her parents. Generally B person who is under the power and authority of another possesses 110right to choose a domicile. Thus the domicile of a minor child is always that of the father, and necessarily changes with any change of the father's domicile. Cases &ted 15 Tex, Juris, pm 715. 9 R.C.C. pm 547 #lO. And a student who goes to a university, school or college is deemed to have retained his fanner domicile unless he shows an intention to make a change to the place in whioh the institution is located. See 9 R.C.L. p. 552, #15. In view of the foregoing we are of the opinion that the minor in question has fulfilled the residence re- quirements. With reference to your last question, it is our opinion that as a miror's domicile is that of the father"s B minor has complied with the residence statute, supra, though the minor has never actually lived with the parents in Texas before going to school or work:ir:g outside ,the Stats, if the parents have been domiciled in this State for four years next proceeding the appointment. We have assumed in the latter two questions that the parents were not divoroed. Ke have further essumed in all questions that the residence or domicile upon which the question is based has been es- tablished for the required four years next preceeding the appoi&ment. Trusting this satisfactorily answers your inquiry, we are Yours very truly ATTORNEY GENERAL OF T&XAS By s/Benjamin Woodall Benjamin Woodall Assistant By e/Elton M. Cyder, Jr. Elton M. Ryder Jr. APPROVED SEP. 13, 1944 P. Blackbum s,/fXao. (ACTIKG) ATTORNEY GEhwAT, OF TEXAS Approved Opinion Committee tiyR~!dB -., Chairmen