OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEYCSENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorable John C. Merburger
bounty Attorney, Fayette Couaty
LI Grange, Texas
Deer Sir r
we eohowledge rece ter dated April 25,
1941, with atteo an 'es8lgnment end
transfer of wage Bsuleh Thompson on
April 9, 194l, w h the County Superin-
tendent or Faye in your letter that
the a8algnor 1 oommon eohool dim-
triot8 0r Feye ur oplnlon in reaponae
tb the r0ii0d
.ebove question 16 entswered in
how should ruoh payzm&s be made?
sable to mite one Voucher in the
teaoher's salary earned payable to
end assignor or one to the assignee
gnment end one to the earignor for the
balano e9
“3. Ii the iirst question ia answered in the
arrirmative may the County 3Up8rint8ndtsnt require
that the original asrlgnment be deposited with him
berore he oen be held liable for iallure to meke
payment in aooordanoe with the request of the ar-
uignse?w
291
Honoreblo John C. Marburger, peg0 2
Artiale 28834, Vernon’s Annotated Ststutea, enaated
by the 46th Leglaletura, reeds, in part, as follows1
*Art. 26834. Assignment, transfer or pledge
or compensation ot teaohera or aohool employees
nYeotion 1. Deilnltlon-Teeoher end Sohool
Baployee; The terms ‘teaoher,’ end 'Bohool
entployee,l within the pro~ialona of thlr hat shell
be held end deosd to embreoe and inolude any per-
son employed by any Publio Sohool System, Indepen-
dent Sohool Diatrlot, or CommonSchool District,
in this Stete’ln en exeoutive, admlnlatretive or ’
olerloal oepeolty, or as e superintendent, prfnolpal,
teaoher, or instructor, end any parson employed by
a university, or oollego, or other educetlonel in-
stitution in an exooutlve, adminiatretive or
olericel oepaoity, or as 4 professor, or 1natruo-
tor, or in any similar oapaoity.
wee. 2. An assignment, trenafer, ple?,ge, or
similar Instrument exeodted by any teeoher or aohool
amployse, wherein any aalery or wages, or any lnter-
eat therein or part thereof, then due or rhioh ney
beoom due to auoh teaaher or aohool employee under
en existing contract cl employment, shall be vslld
and enioraeable, provided that suoh assignment,
transfer, or pledge be in writing end aoknowledqed
in the same menner es required ior the eoknowledgment
oi tl deed or other instrument for registration, end
provided further th&t if auoh instrument be executed
by a mrrfed person it shall also be exeouted and eo-
knowledged by his or her spouse in suoh manner. Suoh
en assignment, trenaier, or pledge shall br valid
only to the extent that the indebtedness secured
thereby is a valid obligation. Any aohool district;
oollegr, university or other sduoetional Inati~Utlon
County Sup2rlntendent, or eny disbursing agent there&m
shall be quthorlsed to honor suoh haalgnment without
being lubjeot to any lieblllty thereior to the teacher
or aohool employer so ereouting auoh aaaignment~ end
any sum paid to any aaal~nee in aaoordenoe with the
terms of any auoh eaalgnnent shell be deemed to bo
a peymant to or ror the eooount oi such teaaher or
sohool employee; but auoh assignment shall be valid
and lntoroeeble only to the extent of any 8alary
292
Honorable John C. Ytirburger, page 3
whloh nay be due or may become due and eemed
by suoh teaoher and lehool employee during the
oontlnuanoa of his or her emplopmentby auoh
aohool diatrlot, oollege, university, or aduca-
tlonal inatitutl0n.e
In OUT Gpinion No. C-2141, dated April 8, 1940, we
held that the ebove quoted statate olearly authorlzea a teeoher
to eaalgn his or her salary In the manner therein stipulated. We
also held in the same opinion that It la the right and duty ot tte
employing diatrlot to honor auoh asalgnmenta when the same are
regularly ereouted snd duly presented by the erlrignee for payment.
We have also held In our Opinion No. o-2643, dated August
27, 1940, that en aeslgnmcnt authorized by hrtlole 2883a which la
not notarized es required by statute *Is entirely 1nvelld.e
Aoosrding to the aopy of the assignment and trnnsrer
forwarded to us in your letter, the assignment in thia instanoe
waa not *aoknowledged lo the same manner as required for the BC-
knowledgement of a deed or other instrument or regletretlonw as
required by titio1.e 288%. It this la true with relerence to
the oriqlnsl aaslgnment it is our aonsldered opinion that ths
aaaignment in question la invalid. Opinion Ho. O-2643.
For your lnformetlon and oonvenlenos we are enoloslng
herewith a true end oorreot copy of our Opfnlon No. O-2141 end
Opinion No. O-2643.
In response to your queatlon number one, it is our
opinion that aaslgnmenta of this nature, when exeoirted-and ao-
knovledged in acoordanoo with tbo statutory prorlslona, are
ralld and should be reoognlzed by the oounty superintendent.
In reply to your second question, it is our opinion
that If would be edvlaabJo to stake papent to the esaignee end
assignor by aeparata touohera, This, however, la n metter that
should be worked out by the oounty euperlntendent.
Honorable John C. Marburger, page 4
In response to yo;rr third question, It is our opin-
ion that the oounty superintendsnt tar the legal right to re-
quire that the original assignment be deposited with him before
payment is made to the assignee. The duly and legally lxeouted
arsigamcat lr the only authority that the oounty superintendent
has to make payment to anyone other than the assignor, an& we
think good buaineas practioe requires that he insist oa the tiling
with hilpof the original assignment before payment. is made ao-
oordlng to its term3 aad provleionr.
Trusting that we hare sufiiclently answered your inquiry,
wo are
Yours very truly
XTTO:iY GE?iiRALOF TEXAS
ATTORNEY- -.---
: tiEN.MA.Ij Assistant