OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Hill
RuMOl~ QoDIIf~
.
"I believe ii you will nrrr to Art. 1891,
- &tel'fEittin6 the appQlatann6 0r drputy dlatrio6 olerk,
end rirt.1938, llkewleo permlttlng the appointment
or county olork, you will obbarvb that both atatutea
among othar things, aleo at&r, 'auoh daputlaa ehall
:
vol. 1, pace 848, Corpue Jurue Sboundaa, in
8peaking Of thle authority 1. 0.. 88 to 8tatut8 merely
etatlng th alotk no wlb & g b be
matant,
k b boron
n luoh
offloor Ye hit ln hie own
0 him deputy, ha MY ta aam,
or that 0 hle prinoipal, but tbr 1Ueron00
4 10 116 emid-
ant', that if thb statute prssorlbo& that thb deputy
oa% aot only in tho IMW o? hi8 ptimolpal, thbn euoh
aot mubt ba dono in thb name of thb principal, and
not that of tho deputy. * * +*
Artlolae'l898 and 1958,..Vbrnon~*Amot~tod Clrll 8tatutb0,
wbro oarbfully oonaldbrbd whbn thb original opinion ma wrlttbn, al-
though luoh artlolbe arb not quoted therein. Artlolb 1898, Vernon's
&UIOtUtbd emi atwAtb0, ~-Ode a0 fOU#WOZ
'T&kmdlatrlot olrrk may, in wrltln(, War
him hand and the seal O? hla bourt, appoint one or
1ore dopfatioe. !C& appointment ahall bo reoardrd
in th0 oiri00 of tho ooanty olork. &oh aepotf
ahall tak$tho offlolal oath, en6 ohal& sot la
the nom of meld prlnoipal, andrat Q and Dorform
all maoh biiiofal note le nay bo lartullr dona ana
pbrforme~d by euoh olerk ln Pbrum. If thb olbrk
dobe not rbaldo in tho oouatr aeat he ehall barb
a dbpPty rerldln8 thora.'
Artlola 1938, Vbrnon*a stated Civil &atutea, pro-
tldoea
"Tha wtmty olork py, in wrltlni& appoint
on. OT Mro brpUtib. uadbr hle hand and lbti oi
hl0 ~($a+& uhloh lhall bo rOOOrdbd in th8 0ffi00
Honorablb Roy L. iiill,&X%60 3
of suoh olark, and shall bb depoeltrd In tho OifiCb
- or thb dlstriot olark. The deputy ohall takb thb
ofilolal oath and ahall aot in thb nbmb of the prlncl-
pal, nud may do aud patform all euoh official eota us
may bo lawfully donb and perforomd by auoh Olbrk in
pbroen. Ikontho olarkdoaanet raEi inth alounty
aoat, ha shall have a depu8y.neldln6 tharhw
Thb forogalna statutbe pertain to tho appointrmct or
doputlea by bounty olbrbrand dlatrlot OlbrkO. Thbao atatatbe
muet bb OOMtrubd and @oUidbred rlth Art1010 3908, a lator
statute, rogardlw tha lppolntmnt of dbputlbe, aeelataate and
olbrke 0r all dlatrlot and 'oouuty orzioiale oomlng within thb
torma or auoh ltatuto. It lo olbu that dlrtrlot olbrk8 and
ootuxtyolbrka when 89polntln& dbputlee muot oom~ly wlth .Artfolb
3908 am wbll us Artlolb 1898 and Artlolb 1.938.
With rbfsrbnoe to deputy ootity clerke and dbputy
dletr$ot olbrke taking ao~lbdgrbnte, the rorbgofng ltatutoe
muat bo ooneldarad and oomtrubd with Artloloe 6608, 6603, 6608
and 6606, Wornon' Amotatod Cltll Ytatutre.
Artlolo 6603, 8upra. provider:
m loknuwlbd~tor anln -8 or rrlilly
for the purpose of be4 rooordad ohall be by the
~aittar or ~wraoawhe exbouted same lppouln& bofora
coma orfloor authorlud to take aokwwlbd~nte, and
ltatiq ]M had eXbouPed the aamo for thb oonaldbra-
that
tlon and parpoeee thbroln etatbd; and tha ortloor taking
euoh aeknowlodgwnt shall make a,obrtifioate thbrbof;
sign aid ebti the *am rlth him lbal 0r OrfiOb.”
miole 6606, prwldoer
-Aa oirtcwr taking an aoknorledglenh oi a dood,
or other lnatrumnt of writin& must plaoo thwoon hle
ortlolal cbrtirloato, rignod by him and iiglvbnunder him
8sa.l or orrioa, subetantlally in r0m as herbinarter
prbaorlbbd."
knorablb Roy L. Hill, pagb 4
The 8aproma Court or the Yttato o? ?8unoaeea in the
ceebof Wllkbreon v. Daneleon. bt al, 80 3. 1. 765, eald:
"Th8rb OUI 60 no doubt but that undbr Both
of the lbotlone or thb Codo rofbrrod to a lo&ally
appointed &epaty of a olork af thb oounty oourt lo
luthorlred to takb thb privy bxamlnatlon of a mar-
rid wemae to a oonveyenoe of l&orreal letatb, and
thb only opbn prretlon lo whbthbr or not thb oartil-
tloato whibh lo ,rbqulnd t0 bb made Or the bXaml~-
tl.a ehall shorthat it am aado ‘and lleeed by him
an 8UOh deputy, or m&b in thb ea6o of the principal
aud suthbntioatbd by h i8 ll@aatUr%
*Therb lo nOthin& ln etther or theav eectione
dlrbotlng the cour88 to bb pursued, and thb question
must bb datbrmlnad upon prlnoQal.
-
"Mr. i4eahbm. in him work upon Pub118 Ofrlo8re,
0 508, ham vary olearly steted the law upon the sub-
jOUt in thb80 WOti8:
*‘ffhO QUb~ntiOO kr Who@. U8M a dOQuty Of?iOer
8Bauld not lo one o? muoh in rtanaa and of ooneldsr-
lbl@ apparbnt und@rtaintyI 4% rontllot in thb 08080
lr, hawaver, klik~od to la0 pore *marbut *ho real, a&
~M~;~lly eettlbd bp rbfbrenob to ,pfnclplbe already
.
l'Sn 8btor6l of thb lta k e tin lathorlty to not
in an orrloi8l oapioity lo gltom to the plaoipal alone,
or, if the appolntmbnt OS Qbputlbe lo recognlsed or au-
thorlzbd by lla, they UT regardad a* fhb mbro prlrato
agbnte or 8bnafite~Of the prinoipal, and not an indbpbn-
dbnt pub110 orflobra dbrlrlng indbpondbnt authority fropl
thb law. tfhbrb SUOh 10 tb 0.80. thb UUihority bxOrOi.bd
by thb db*ty dbrlvatlvb and 8Ub8idktSy
i. IIUUiiib8tl!?.
onb - it lo thb authority oonfbrrad upon thb prlnoipal.,
and not an authority iphorent in tha deputy. It rollowe,
then, logioally and lar&rlly;that thb authority lheald
bb UZbrOiUbd fn the W o? hia in whom it bxi8t0, and
not in him nemb, whoor himmlr ham no reoognirbd au-
thority at all. Thb arsoutlon should, thbrororo, bo in
thb n.00 0r thb prlnolpal alone or in the namb 0r tho
principal by thb doputy~
Sonorablb iiopL. IiiU, pago 5
**In oth8r etatoe, a8 ham bbon non, the deputy
_ 18 am an indopbndbnt pub110 OfiiObr,
rboognl&bd and IO
lndowbdby law with wthorlty tb do my a06 whloh tile
prinoipal lnightdo. fa thee0 oaebe, whbn thb author-
ity Oxieta ln tho deputy hlauelt by o~ratlon o? lav,
and lo not derlvab ~loly thrtmeh the plnalrml, it I8
well uoeutod lu tho neao or him ln~,w&m it oxlete, thb
dopaty hirrolr.
Wlhadbr either state 0r faote tho authority of II
epmolal deputy, V&Q, am ham bobn ebon, lo rb&ardOd am
the mre prfrato agent o r lorvai~tor tho prlnolpal,
would un&oe othonleo prorldad by atatutta,bo properly
arorofead in tho name of the prlnclpl.*
*ysiare of thb opinion that dbputy olarlo, o? the
oounty oourte o? this state are authorlsbdto takb and
outlay tho eoknowlbd~nt of doode ln bath the name
et tholr prinolpeleand thameolroa am depntlse. Tho
authority to do 80 in thb namb of thbir prlnolpale is
donfbrrbd by ebot%on 4OS0, SupPa; ranting ln than all
tb pmvera of prlnolpal olbrkew and abotlon eO39, aupra,
oorirsraupon thOm in thblr o??iolal aapaolty ,a868putiba
thb authority lndopsnden~of that dorived iror the prln-
Oip8l Oibrkh This la88 me Ml4 by
thle oourt la thb
oaaa or Rbaomont v. Xoataiia, 0 Iiumph.648, uluin ms no-
howle6&mnt er, probeto ma& an6 li&ne4 by a &oput~ olork
in hle own aama, that of thb prlnolpal nowhere appearing,
wan held valid, ,and the dbbd poperly luthbntiaatbd ?or
rogiatrrtlon; aedthla was aleo na??irmd in tho later
aaaa or Ti~Mnxi,~ tonbe, 10 I@lak,,5&S,,!@
The Court of OrtiallulA$pbala a? Tuna in thb oaeb in?
&i50. TI,&Tl, 'with refbranaa to a doputt ooantf
ins aa dath, laldr
*The aoputy my &B, under the law what him
prlnoipal may do ,inlfna of duty darol& upon the
prlnaipal. This ,fetho (onaral roti, aad unlbae there
aro ltatod rroaptloBe, bhb ganbrti rulo appllba, but
wham the sot aannot bo Ilo pbrforad, and the deputy
la repulPb6 to do the 8Ot hlnublf, thin rule 6obU not
*mW- I? it pbrfainr:to hti lndlvldually, lubh 88
takln@ oatho, ho oauaot verify la the numb of tha pln-
01941. Thie newan tombagfully raaognlwd by tho autmrl-
kionorable Roy L. Hill, p-8 6
Cle8. Thl8 amtter underwent lnveatlgetlon in Palmer
v. tiacarthy,8 Colo. Apa. 488, Sl Pao. W; al8o in
Robinron ‘I. Orem (a. 0.) 87 red. IN. ahero the
admlnlstoring OS aa oath lr roqdnd, ba oannot ad-
nini8t8r it in tb8 MM Of tb paOip& mb h8
d-iv88 &ia authority fror thi pdXIOi& $n l c u ta in
8011io,he king i deputy and qualiti8d under th8 law
a8 ruoh d8put th o oath ldainiBt8rod ru8t b8 by’him.
m oullmt 8daPnirtu it iu th8 n&s bf the prlnoipal,
nor can ho o8rtitp that tho prinoipal adainlrterod tlm
oat&through OP by him ab deputy. ,UhOr8 an oath or
aifirrution ia t.qUfrOd, it Purrt b8 adPaini8tOr86 by
th8 OffiO8r taking it. 38 oannot admlnirt8r it
through umther. Th8 jurat PO8t 8hw th8 oath takon
Na8 by th8 officer a&ahioterin& It. If the prlnol-
pal adalni8terr the oath, it mu82 80 reOlt8. IS the
d8mty do.8 it, it =8t =Oit. it Wa8 doll8by th8
deputy, ,not that it Wa8 done bg.tho prinolpnl through
the deputy. Ths authoritloo seem to be oleas upon
thm proporltlon, and draw the d~tlnatlon. Yoe note
In B Cyo. 1X and other authoritie8. Thir doe8 not
mIlltat& against th8 propo8ltlon that In ordinary
l&illiIbtUi~Watt8-, 8UOh ai3the i88UaIlO8 Oi 9rO0.88,
f lling~papew, and Ddt8rS of that sort, aaaa may M
lmm10~ in tb nmaoi the prlnoipal throw@ or by th6
deputy, but thi8 doe8 not,:psly to tuklng atfIdarlt8
or adidnlaterlne oath8. ”
,i .,~
_ ,: . ,,.~.I
Q~ :, i,’
floham al80 ouotully k8ia0r8d tho oar0 oi xarlon
ihOhS. Four&r & YUDlllY cOSlD8Uf t. C8litmti lhtol’ tkUW.U4Y.t
?ieS 9. W. 9SS. oon8truing i&i018 1938 whrrela it lr raid1
-* * l AfilOl8 1998, B8Ti88d StatUto8 1999,
(Art. 1749, Rovinod XtatutO8 1911). rOqUiro8 d8pUty
to 8ot in th8 mm8 of hi8 prinelpal; hme8 a JuTat
in the naw of oounty olork by hi8 deputy $8 6ood.
mh8W V. ~d88~ODU8’ CQUXt (TO%. t?iV &BP.) t&d
8. w. 9498 OIDlp t. uomal88loi*n’ murt {hr. civ.
App.) Xl4 S. W. 944.”
Roxiorable Roy L. Elll, page 7
Art1010 46, Vernon*8 Aunotatod Code of Crlmln81
Procoduro, prOVld88s
"WhenoVer 8 duty i8 irpo88d UpOn th0 018rk
o? tho di8trlot or oounty oourt, tho 88~8 may bo
18dU11y wnriormd by hl8 deputy.”
IhpUty OOUnty 010rk8 8nd deputy di8triOt Ol0rk8 are
pub110 offloer8. (Sob DOQR.8 t. Beall, U 8. w. (24,)531; '&.
Jut., Vol. 9, wge 243)
An dot Ot &Z@8t 6, 1870, 8UthOl'inod018rk8 oi the
diatrlot courta, their drputier 8nd notarioa publlo to tako ao-
knoulodgm8nt8 Of do0d8 8nd other nitton in8trumbnt8 roqnlrod
by 18~ tc be rooord8d in thi8 Stoto. 'pho8tatuto oxproa8ly
ompcwored tho doputio8, 88 well a8 the olerka, to take and oortlfy
th8 aoknowled@tmtts. ~OUbt0f. 011th8 6th Of by, 1871, 8 8t8tllt8
wa8 p088Od emendatcry Of the l@Zi028leto0Ute8 in refbrene0 to tho
prooi and 8okncwlodgmnt of written lnatruments ior the purpcse
of regl8tratlon. That statute purported to amend en Aot approved
bay 12, 18b6. The Supreme Court of thl8 Stat0 in tho o8ae ot
lt 81, 18 S. W. 665, oon8ld0rine the foregoing
that the statute 8uthorlzlng doputg 01erk8 to
t8ke aoktmrlodgnmnt8,~w88not r)poalrd, but 8aldr
Vut, ho*rvrr th$8 mby~hb,'r8 a&a et the opinion
that tho oertf$ioato OS aoknow1odgmont wa8 good. In
Mu8llor 1. Th8tchor, 9 Tex. 482, it ~88 88ld th8t a deputy
county olerk ~08 not authorized to t8ko the aoknowlodgmont
0r I drrd. 8llt th18 A8 ROTblJ’ diOtUl 8rrd it W88 Z’UOOsnf8.d
ir ruoh.ln Roso v. 8ouman1 26 T8X. 1.31,lo whlah it ua8 hold
that a deputy had 8u0h 8uthority. Ths rd.ng in the httor
oe8o hrs beon tollorrsdin Cook ‘1. Knott, 28 Tax. 85, and
in Frlzzel t. Johnaoa, 30 Tox. 31. From the r8pOrt of
the80 Oawp it doe8 not 0188Plf rppoar~uhothrr tho da
01 8r l k 8 intho M mb Ottheir
otod @ llOiP Ol8 Ql’lUltc a t’ ..~
w think that it 18 to b0 int8rrad th8t they oOtod in
their own namo8. At all evont8, it h08 over beon tho
rule In this oourt to rOg8rd the rubatanoo r8th0r than
&h8 ?OS%UQt Ottioiti 8Ot8i 8ti W8.888 1 1lb8B tM t%81
r 088Oll Why, it the d8pUty $8 8UthbriS& t0 t8h th0 80-
kmrledgment, ho may not UBO hi8 om name la mating the
Honorable Roy I..Rlll, page 8
certlrloate. Suoh oortifioeto is in eooordenoo with
the real facts. Tho grantor or the Witm88, as the
oese mey be, appoarr,boforo the deputy. "jhyahould
not the deputy 08rtlfy to that taot OV8Shi8 OfflOi8i
8ign8tUr0 Md th8 8881 Of i&8 OOUti rho80 O??iO8r ho
1#? It ha8 k0n hold bB this BOUCt, and it amy mu
be oonsidered sottlod law with ua, that a return slgued
wlth tho mm0 of a deputy 8horirt 8lon0, 88 deputy, 18
god; and that whore ho h88 ~8old property he.nmy oontey
without using the name O? the 8h6rI??.’
We hero oaretully oonridored the ease of Kirby Lumber
Company Y. Long 224 8. W. 906, montlonod In your letter. This
oaso hold8 thot'a deputy dlotriot olerk oaunot tako a dopoaltlon
in his own uam, but that suoh deputy mat take the deposition
in the name of hla prinolpal. Ye do not think that thi8 0886
oontrol8 ths que8tlon under ooneidoration.
hfter oarotully reoonsidering Opinion No. 0-5496,
in the llgbt o? the 8tatuten and authoritie8 mentionoh by you,
and many other authoritie8, we believe our oplnlon I?o.O-5496
1s 8U8taln6d by the greater weight of authority. Thereroro,
~0 are oan8tnlned to adhere to our former ruling that d8pUty
oounty olerke end d8pUty dl8triot olerk8 have the pwor a,nd
legal euthorlty to take aoknOwlo@nont8 by virtue of th*ir
..:
own
OffiOe8 aador th8 l8w without naaiy thdx prinolpls. 3:;.
.
Your8 very truly
Mt
&'a*11 W12.l18lU8.
d88i8t
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion