Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

t. l 806 OFFICE OF THE A’TT’ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN tour lrttor of An , rsqaartoU the oplaion of this Dqurbont a 8ltb tb 6 th r r o ln a1 to11mmr tha event of sol- Ln the etbat of oyeo LB aot in thr roope oa County buinrrr at Ir.thr County llablr in th l ptlvatol~ owned oar, 4 prlratrly ~wnrtl 08r? 1, thr i prrsonal laJury whoa tJir 4mplo~or i. oa WitkiA thr mopa or hlr duty? ertltm has arlma r1t.R ro&arb to MOb j301iOi44 81th or wfthtut 40111S~OA 3, 844. 52 of thr Ooartltotloa, *Ia riaw oi Art. the lnsamoe 011 y bein& aittoa by a oorrpary whloh plsom the.,81 P mti%6 DA the poliolsmt (a) ‘h ateok in4ur4~44 oglpaay heroin aallsd tko oasy~nf’, lb) . .,..,,.,..-. e .-.. .- -- -- ,c 807 xoaor4blr Rrwaa 8. 6@a6 paw -i 9T&osto& Are &oh lnrumaa4 1101 C6 logs1 ln tlew oi &la om,nrtltotloorl OorpanZ=* prorp"rni.>A~ lx t= 3 0t 0p 0u0mlttmy a8 04 ~81 c 08u6ltt Cioapaay of hsorloa nlth rotyml to lnrnrmoe oa thr Ouuat 4lo+stor, rood6 46 folluwrl 'The QOiapaay'B Umbifity under I of the insuring a(l;rca- mats on aooount lrlok~rsr, dhratr or 444th of one pseoa Is to ths mu of to tho Sam llalt for asoh ‘6 total llabllltp on roeorurt ot odlly lajtut, ri ~466~ Ulraarc or @oath of 0010 thkilQ&Xir4?6op,,a6 8 ?‘46ult Ot ot6 6OOld(LAt, i6 1lIdt.d to the ma or flO,Oco.CO.' ??ot!ld th4 couaty bo Uablw to Forsons innjurr&In 8ua lh lovator4 I6 6l@h ln6urQ2ca 1*gm:-* Tour letter of Aquat 18, 194) psttsinlng to outrin RlttOrO 810~$fOn~d in th4 ?oTOgOiAg hft*r r@RdS a6 fOfb~6a 8ftoa f of 0 poll0 urltton by Genaral Cssaelty co!!tpaIl~of &NT !om WltE rrgud to iA6UPaAOO OA the County*s a],o+ator,Nds a8 follOw8! '?h* OfIfepsnf'6 llrbllit~ l3d6r prra- ma f of th6 irr6urlne agreonlAt6 on soeouat of P.oC$ly lajurp, tlckncrs, dlrc~~a CT bath of me jcrrcn 16 l!zlted tc the 6u2 o? j-0 MC rubjcot tc thr $are lL.lt fcr aa&. ~-UOOA, 6~0~ clorato*7 I6 6u6h lnauraaaa lrolr ‘Loulr t Ia44 mdont S&o01 Dirtrlat of Cho city Of hl6till - &f 68=' Id - f;3(;0 s8 666.36 t0 aettlr the qw8tlon propoumlod in the ebol4 paraC;ra;h.* Z!hi6dOpUt*lbflthas ?#dar#d 6et~sl 0pl~loA6 WitahlgB t&a lisblllty oi th8 Steto (laoltsdi~ oauatles am &ho fBato@r lUbdirl61?8 nrrolally thr ww8r or mvrrsl~ty) In tbo 8bsoaos oi 6 rrtetuteoraatlag saoh llablllty. &4 4aoloao c 80 Eoaorablr Roagm 8. Nyohe PW@ 3 for out latoraetioa ooplre of Oplnlone 606, O-3)3,0-2136, O-24{], O-2779, and O-779. Ti.18 flret two peraprphe ot ooi lettar of Awuet 16, 1943 (whleb le quota4 above f oontala four ueetione rwadlng thr Uabilltt of Uar oouaty uader the 1lo teetsted. fa viewo f the fo r r teing 0ia lo ne ltl tho uthorltlee elted therein, It 18 our oplaPoa that.tie t ouaty 18 not lrgall~ lirblr for eny damage8 done t0 the pritatclp ormd rutmobile er lotosobllre lnrol?ed. Grvx coaaty 18 aot legally liable for any psreanel lnmjury eue- ! tehd by aay 01 tho ps~eote lntolreilor mntlonedr The tollarlng ex@srpt from the o ln10n i.8the mea oi 5rpn 18 Liberty bounty, W9 S. W. 30P , jO&, illuetratre the tmlform holding of thr Trxae eolate 00 the qUeetiOA whether the oounty be hold lirblr for thr lafurl~~ or daaa#pe haratoforr ImntloAed: 9. . . It her lone born the lam in tuae thet l OOUAtl i8 not liablr iA d6Aag.B to? ~@reoA#). IA thr lart parrgraph of your latter o? huguet 16, 19k3, vhloh le rofrrred to IA your letter of Augur2 18, 19L3, you rek iA efie$t would the county be llablr to the poreone who are injured OA the aouaty elalstO~'r Ia lewr to thie qusmtlon it 1s our opinion that what baa bran leld above with reiersnoe to the llabllity of the rowit In onewsr to your fltet question 18 equally applioablr to thle qurrtlon, an4 thucfora the oounty wou1.d not be llsblo. Apparently thr oounty orrrlre 809 Eoaoreble Rm.Ean 8. ryohe m#3 4 eoao fern of 118bllity lneureaca prrteinln~ to thr rlerator ilr qurethn and 7ou a*&"& moh laeurenor legalo” You further #tats that thhrearn of La18 Ia. Inde endant 8ohool nletrlot of thhr Cltr of Auetln lb 8. h. (26) $96,eeaoad to eottle tbe queetloa propouaded L tour letter of Awet 16. W@halo ouoful4 eoueldors4 tho 8bolr m6ablonsd mar, M it la OUT oplalan that thie oaee ha8 ao e~plleatlon vhet- loew totho qaoetlcme uadrs ao~eldsetlaa. The quretloe preemte4 la thie moo vbe whether the Legielature, b umot- aed of Artlolg (660-e-4 V.A.C.~., eoold eonetltet1oea.k i luthorlee’the lehool dletrlot, l politloel eorporatioe, to arohaee a palloy of aotual lneurane*r The 80pr6380 Court, Pa the esae of Levi8 ve fndopaoclent Sohool r?letrl~tof Glty ;tAAEe;la, at al., 161 8, t% (2d) 450, h&Sd;that Artlolr r86Oe-6, vae uaoonet~tutionel a; *lolrtlrrElsotloa 52 of Aikioie’!11 of the 8kte Coaet~tution. Thr ltidgautte of the trial oowt md ths (lourt of Cl~ll Appels we?o rrture4 sad tho leuei remanded to the trial court vith &etruotione to eraat th8 lajun*tMa. Utu l oarrrul erueh of the rtatutre we Sallea b tlad my etatuto lBthorlrlng thr eountf to ourf the kind of iaetuenee In quoetloa;therefore, lt 18 oar o i~nlonthat the louaty bou not hat* ruthority to sarr# 8u el h!urule8 and pay the prloo of the praolwe thueoa. Tour8 rrrl truly