Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Eionorabla8. T. Ualters County Auditor smith county Tyler, TexaI) Dear Sfr: Your repuert r0r 0p carefullyoonaideredby thle your request aa follOwa: th County are oompensat- ema Snlary Iat. Texas ZIOFany county &all be abarged with or pay to any of the officers 80 compensated,any fee or oommia~lon for the performanoe of any or all of the duties of their offioes but auoh offloers shall rt?OeiQe eald salary in lieu of all other fees, oo4nmlrsions or oompen8ation whlah they would othervisebe authoriced to 1 Honorable B. T. Valtera, page 2 retain; provided, houevec, that the assessor and oolleotor of taxes shall oontinue to ool- loot end retain for the benefit of the Offioera' Salary Fund or funds hereinafterprovided for all fees and oommlraionavhlch he is authorized under l&u to oolleat; and it shall be hla duty to aoaount for and to pay all au& monies re- aeived by him into the fund created and movld- Seation 5 of Artiole 59l2e, Vernon’s Annotated Texas Civil Statutea, reads 1x1part a8 follouar "It shall be the duty of all orfi$era to oharm and eolleat in the mnner authorlred Y lav all fees and oo~~~A#Slo~.vhlohare per- mlttsd by lav to be assessed and aolleoted for wmfomned b? them. all offlalal ler via e As end uhen muah fee8 are colleated they alaall be deDo#ited In the Offlaeral SalAry Fun& or funda provided in thla Aat. . . .” Artiole 5561, Revised Civil Qtatutee of Te%aa, reada as followa: “Offlaer.a and jury fees. In auoh aaaea the offiaera ahell be allowed the same fees aa are now alloued for alallar aervloea performed in miadeamnor oaaea end the jurors ahall eaah be allowed a fee of One ($1.00) Doller, to be paid out of the estate of the defendant, If he have an estate, othervise by the aotmty on aoaounta approved by the aounty judge." (This utiole appeara in the chapter relating to lunacy prooeed- inga and ia the uosta allowed offiaera and jurora in lunaoy prweedlnga. The fees allowed the of- ficers in luneoy oaaea are tued as aoata In the oatbe. ) Honorable B. t. Waltera, pa(&e3 Lunaoy prooeedlngaare of a aivil, and are not of a arlmlnal nature - inaanltq ia not a orlmet in aontra- diattnotionit la a dlaeaae - White vs. lfhlte,196 S. Y. 508 (sup. ct. or Tex.). A lunroy proaeeding la a olvil, and not queal orl- mlnal, proceeding. Bx Part6 Singleton, Court of Crlmlnal Ap- peals, 141 s. Y. 123. In Oplnlon lo. O-259, thla departmentheld, (UOA& other thhga, that a lunaay proeeedlng vaa a alvil oases that the fees due a aounty clerk in lunao7 aaaea~~aoata , in a civil oaaei that if the defendant in lunacy had no ea- tate the alork ahould oolleot hlr aoata in the aaae from the aount7 from the general fund0s the oount7 and alnee the alerkwu opesatlng under the Offlaera* Salary Uvhe should plaoe luoh pqment of aorta into the Offiaera' 8alar7 Fund 0s the aount7. Thla Ye tblnk auffloientil7 enavers 7our question with refereaae to the aount7 olerk and Ye enaloae herevith a aopf 0s Opinion MO. O-259. It rouowa andit Is our rwa8r opinionthat the samerule vould lppl7 to the oounty attonoy of slith Couu- t7* UJFtdb Enoloaure