OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY .GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
“In your 0plnloIlwoo.o-48364,next ta the
laut $ara@aph, you Otabe tha4'wh.Q.amtlnuow
phydoal prelretum is not required,the permn
mwt bo phyaloallyprooentIn thin State under suoh
airoum8tanaUand for nuoh a subrrt6ntlal part of .tho
tlm~perlodinvol~ed~ulUreaaonablylndioate
t&at Torae lm in faOt, a8 well a8 lntantlon,hle
fixeLand #trairnont
~&au. oi abode durln~ the
entire period rsQulred.*
wfn the light or thl6 epinlon,dou .thiaap$ll-
oant netitthat reqdremant?
~hwtual reefdcmom* In the foregolug prorirrlon+4
of neoeoelt~~ to the one year aa til M the five y-r
requlrenrbht.* nape rule of Intentplus pbyslaaLpreselloo
Is a pllaableto befh requiremen48.We outllned4hir rule
ln&o~amn~s froakourOpl@lon#o.O4864 whlahyar quoted
$n your letter am as4 oh abo7m.
we find thlm amno rule ann0uno.d by the TeXaSoOUt@
in oonrtrul.ng the eta4utespresorlbingresidenosrequircrmat8
In dlvmroo aotlon8. In Dl&IIUon V. Dlokiason,1.983. VP.805,
Iimwrable J. 8. Murohieon,xxeoutlve~lmmtm, Page 3
-here oan bd no doubt, we think, that the
an aotual rssldeueefor the six
statute dsrpands
months,68 diatin&ahed fronta le@ resldemo.e,
ubloh paapbe lsaintained in one plaoe while aotuaZl-
1yllYlng In another. As said by this aourt in
Mlohael v. hfidohael,
34 Tax. Olv. 4pp. 630, 79
9. n. 741 'It ww Intendedby the statute not
only t~~uospe1an~otual,good faith lnhabltanoy
of this state, but au!aotualrssl&noe In the
.oountywhere the Isuitfor dlYoroela blatltuted,
upon the part of the party seeklq the dlrara,.'
Xn coxwtru5.qa similarstatute~theSupraare Court
of l;santtr@y
in Tipton v. Tipton,89 Xy. 843, 6
5. w. 440, heM that WtWl resldtmoe ia rmmlred.
,331
mymud Y. ~Xaymo~M, 74 3'0% .a4, 18 8. W. 90S
St~wan held ~thata 4wporary absenooimm then
~oountywquld not.affw4 4he rIghti to malnta&nthe
ault, but 14 oannotbe a tesaporarJr residenor MM&~
nln~tenths of the +.x monthnnext $reo
f" :+ ,.the
suit Is_,..
qynt. out.~o..the,::ooun
-2 y,:,aZ$
The oondl4ion 40whloh a”fwrty weklng a
dim&a la subjeatQ4or realdeunoe in the.oountyfor
six nonth8 nert psciedlng'the flllng of his p&4&
tfon la abmlats. There I8 no rsoape from hit.
The resldenoeruw4 be aottml~it ~mla4be oon4ilmot&u~
xt la not nwi3fisarythat awry day nor perohtmw every
waok mast be passed in the oounty, but the bulk UC
the time nuat.be~rssed4hsr~l.n."
Appllring
these primlpls~ to tho fast 814uatiOnpro-
suited,It U our oplngcin th64 the lpplioantdoea not no04 the
requlreaent 6f ~ae4wl rwida100 . . . far one (1) year Imad-
lately~eocrbJad*hez a glloation. The lpplioantmu4. be
phy&oally prawnt in tiie etato tar a aubetwtlal part of’th4
two time perlousspeolfiadlrithe law lrceapeotln of the
reamma for her abnenoeorher intentionto rem%
se quote the seoond faot sltuatlon as pro~entsd by
"An-a~ lloent who resldti in the Btate of
Ppftwn a twwityyetwar''or psrhape men
Texan.for S
lower, ~6s oomloted of a.FedoMl arIme and scraten60d
' ~HOaorablea. s. Mumhfson,~grsontla Dlreot++, page 4
.
40 the FederalBinltmitleryat Leavenworth,
X~~uu,whwa heuas oonfinedfor a period of
t!mlYeamath or longer. H1a abrronoafraithe
SttbtaOf Terarr.10 eti@rOed. He has no Intention
~,~~ot'abandon+id3Ma re,siUuoeand upon hla rslea8a
f'mm the rodoral Penltentlary, he lmmdlately I
rOtnrPiato the State, either after hntlng served
.hle 8iwAemw,~ on parole. IIShaa not been.
physShli.y~jywont nlthln the state ror any wt.
of the twelve montha lmmedlatelypreoedding: the
date Of ItI8~pllOa4i6n but has rtmld& ln the
St+tq:for a 6ubs~tial part of the flre yeerr
'_. :o?at-efthe ~a.~ireoetllag the applktatlon. m8
,th@ appUoantmea4 the rf+lenoe requlremnk %a
.-,;: '#4fy#lt, at,op.nlon,JI?. 0+44?"
'z
The appllotitin thl8 imtanoe ia like&e lmll~-
in aumer to qtmtion (1) fa tha4
blo ior iha reaaooacr~giren
helm6 notebeen .ally ,presqntin ~tha,
St&e for any gwt
T
of theRtwelve3uont -4nmedlatalypreodlng hti~application.
Ia. i4lnerant who he never had a ihad w w-
aanon plaoe of rasl8ianoabut ha# traveledthrough-
amthe unlt8d Sates for Poet of his llfo,bn4 due
to h$a a@.he 4~ tumble $0 niakahis livLrg.andtravel
dmudj thereforo,heillea anapplloacloa. Thii
perun he been phyn1oall.y presentla tho 8k4e of
Tarur for a total,of olxty month8,or flea yur8
out aitthe lestinine. Does he mat the realdon@@
reqtiramat? If not, would It make any diiferenoa
IS he has rscrldad ao&tSmunmlyln the State fOrtb6
.twlveptonth83.mmltih4 *aoedlng the l pplloatlon,
whiohumla fm(ll6atahlaintentiontomakoTexa0 I"
hirpman~bplroaor abode?
*‘fn ,tlm oat0 of an ltlnerant, do we have to
prove'lntentlon 40 m&e Texas hlzifixed and permamn4'
plueo of abodo dwlq the parlod of tlw aa well II)
ths faot that he welduutual;lyreal6ln~in the State?*
Yer. phydoal preewee la the stattifor a total or
rim yeara out or the ifid nim yt34kra
wad not ra.rm th0
rmt r88lda00 requirement0r the appiiaantb the ab804t~e
cC&uiln&mtien to make his ptmnemnt horn in Texas during
A p&e&a Intentionto talrsup a permanentabode
in Toxaa ¬ b6 orde retrowtiw- w as to give .thoatrtw
or resldacre ti0prrioda or previotw Ftprsioalpo8ewe in the
state ii the aFplioantdid not in faot have ths intantlonto
make Texa# hi6.pmmnwt howo at the time of nroh prim! ln-
+srllllttarlt ao$nllw wlthln the hate.
YQW! rojirthsl+tlon reada as'iolloss:
Homrable J. 3. Murehlaon, Executive ~ootw, pclrgs
6
$atwdad tc mks TWU his permanent plaoe or abode; muld ,,
not bo concluelw.
opinionoolwlttee
By LU..B. OhafrolM
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion