Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Mr. D. W. Stakes, Cashier Texas Prison System Huntsville, Texss Dear Mr. Stakes: We acknowled lier has remed t0 pas8 amount of the premium to ardor that this office hoald not be approved by a specifio appropriation f this olalm Is one that may 6gd'Er psylaentout of the current appro- \off$d/eon February 14, 1939, in Opinion No. O-201, held that thB State Board of Bealth was unauthorized to in- sure State property in its possession against loss by fire unless a specifio a$propriation had been made for that pur- pose. That opinion was bottomed upon the proposition that the Le&slature had in Senate Conaarrent Resolution No. ?I, passed at the Second Called SassIon of the 37th Legislaturei declared it to "be the fixed,palley ot this State to oarry its omn Insurance upon State buildings and aeptsmts, and that no ):I-. D. W. Stakes, Page #2. insurance policies ehall be taken out upon ony of the public buildings and oontents thereof ...* Oplnion Ro. O-842, dated May 25, 1939, holds that the Commissioner of Agrioulture has.no authority, in the absence of a speoifio appropriation for suoh purpose, to ,paythe Premium on a fire or casualty insuranoe polioy Issued on certain livestook owned by the State. An available apeoifio appropriation to pay the pre- mium on any kind of a polloy Issued in favor of the State would amonnt to a subeoquent deolaratlon of polioy by the Legislature and would, to that extent, repeal the polloy announced by the Resolution above referred to. In the instant ease, there is a speolflo appropria- tion made to the Teraa Prison Syatsm for the purpose of paying “liability lnsuranoe premlums.W It, therefore, neoessarily follows that if the polloy on which the premium Is sought to be paid from said appropriation is solely a oolioy of that ohtwaoter, your queatlon may be answered in the affirmative. For the purpose of this opinion, the matarlal provi- sions of the polioy aret .- The Rartford Steam Boiler Inspeotlon and Insuranoe compao~ of Hartford, cozmeotiout ... *In oonsidemtlon or $2.172.30 premium doe6 hereby agree with Texas Prison Board and/or Texaa Prison System and/or Its Eleoted or Appointed Of- rloem, whoae la6reaa la Fiuntrville,Texas, Cm- peoting loss (3koiuaing 10~1 of the kind dsroribsa in Seotion II, and Inoludlng lees of the kind dea- orlbea in Seotlon Iv) from an aooldent as herein deflnad to an objeot desorlbed herein, occurring during the polioy period which la from May 23, 1939 to Ray 23, 1942, at 12 o’olook noon, standard time, as to eaoh of said dates, at the plaoe where such accident oooura, aubjeot to a Limit per Aooident of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), ae follows: “SECTION I To PAY the Assured for loss on the , Mr. D. %'.Stakes, Fage lf3. Property of the Ar:?ureddlrcctly damaged by such accident (or, if the Company so elects, to repair or replace suoh dar-la,.ed property), excluding (a) lots from fire (or fron the use of water or other msaos to extinguish fire), (b) loss from an sccl- dent oaused by fire, (0) loaa from delay or Interruption of business or .mnufacturing or process, (d) loss from laok of power, light, heat, steam or refrigeration, and (e) loss from any Indirect result of an aooldenti ... "SECTION m TO PAY, ,to the extent of any Indemnity re- malnlng hfter payment of all loss as may be required under SeotlonrrI and II, suoh amowits ss the Assured shall become obligated to pay by reason of the llabllity of the Assured for loss on the property of others dlreatly damaged by suoh aocldent, Including llablllty for loss of use of suoh damaged property of others; to DEFEND the Aasurea agalnat any olaim or suit alleging suoh damage unless or until the Company shall eleot to effect settle- ment thereofi "SECTION IV To PAY, to the axtent of any Indemnity re- maining after payment of all loss as may be required under Seotlons I, II and III, If loss under Section IV la stated lbova as lnoluaad but not otherwise, suah amounts as the Assured shall beoome obligated to pay by reason of the lIablllty of the* Assured, Inoludlng llablllty ror loss of servloes, on aooount of bodily Injuries (lnoludlng death at any tima reaultlng there- from) sustained by any person and caused by euoh aooldent, except that ths lndemnlty heraunder shall in no event apply to any liability or obligation under any workmen's oompensatlon law; to PAY, if loss under Section 17 la stated above am Included but not otherrime, lrreapeotlve of the &imft per Aooident, for luoh immediate aurglcal relief as shall be rendered at the time Of the aocldent; to DEFEND the Assured, lr loss under %&Ion TV ie eteted above as included .r ..,,I-. D. I?. Stakes, w!w #4. but not otherwise, against any olalm or suit alleging auoh lieblllty unless or un- til the Company shall eleot to effeot settlement thereof; and “SECTION V To PAY, lrreapeotive of the Limit per Aooldent, all oosts taxed against the Assured in any legal prooaedlng defended by the Company in aooordanoe with Seotlon 111 or IV, all interest aoorulag after entry OS judgment rendered in oonueotfcn therewith up to the date of paymant by the Company of its share of such judgment, or ap- all preaulumoharges on ltta o h m e nt peal bonds’required In auoh legal prooaed- Ings, an4 all expenaea Inourred by the Company for auah defenae~ ...(( Sohedulea Nos. 1 and $2,attaohed to the polioy and made a part thereof, deaorlba reapeotlvely the steam and gas engines as the *objeotsw insured. On the baok of aaoh aohedule la printed the saisedeflnltlon of “objaota an4 *aooIdent.m The deflnltlon of aooldent la: *As reapeota any objeot aeaorlbad In this schedula , ‘Aocidant9 shall maa a sudden and aocl- dental breaking, defoxmIag, burning out or rupturltw of the objaot or any part theraor, whlah manifests ltaelf at the time of Its ooourranoa b# hadiately preventing continued operation or by Iamedlataly impairing the tunotiona or tha objeot and whIoh neoaaaitatea rapalr or raplaoamant baiojpa ‘its opera- tion oan be raaumed or Its funotlona roatorad, but the breaking, deforming, burning or rupturing of any gasket or gland paoklng ahall not oonstltuta an aocldent, nor shall tha depletion of m8tSrIal in any part of tha objaot, due to pitting, oorroalon or wear;be oonatrued as an lOdident.* Under SaotIon 1, the Company obligates ftaelf "To pay the Asnured for loaa on the property of the Assured direotly byd a uo hlooldent (or, if the Coa~panyao aleota, to da ma g e rapalr or replaoe luoh damaged property),* lxoludlng loss by fire and othar named eroeptlona. Seotlon 11 has been exoludad from the policy. or. D. W. Stakes, Page #5. Seotion III oblI.qstesthe Company to pay "such amount8 as the Assured shall baoome obligated to pay by reason of tha lIabIlIty of the Assured ror lose on property of others dlreotly damaged by euoh aooldent, InoludIng 1IabIlIty rOr loss of u8e of auoh damaged property or others," and to defend the assured In event of a cult agalnet him ror euoh damages. Seotion IV obligates the Company to pay "euoh amount8 a.~ the Assured shall become ob,llgatedto pay by reason of the liability of the A88ured, Including llablllty for lose or 88~-~ioe8,on aooount of bodily injurlae (lnoluding death at any time resulting therefrom) eustalned by any person and oauaed by auoh aooldent,* exaept llablllty or obllga- tion under any Workmen's ColPpaneatIonlaw, and to pay surgloal reller rendered at time of accident and to defend against any olalms or ault, ato. Seotlon V obligates the COmpany to pay all coats taxed against the Assured in any legal prooeeding defended by the Company In acoordanoe with Seotlone III or IV, sto. In COOhy’8 Briei on the Law 0r Insuranoe (2nd Ed.), page 325, It 18 saidr There are three 01a68e8 Of liability inauranoe -- insuranoe againat llablllty for psraonal Injury to amployes, againat liability for injurlsa to pareons other than amployes, and against llablllty for injurlaa to all olaeaar Or ~r8Olt8.” Again, on page 11, the author eaysr "80 far ae lnsuranoe has been daveloped wlth refsrenoe to aooldental injury to, Or destruotlon or property, a8 by explosion Oi bOIler8, breakage of gl888, and Injury generally by aooldent 8uOh aa injury to an automobile due to ooll&on, lnoludlng injury to, and slok- no88 and death of animal8 Is known as 088Ualty inauranoe.* It IS said in lbriployar*s Liability Aesuranoe OorporatIon V8. Merrill, 155 Lbass.404, 29 N. E. 529, that aooldent insuranoe IS oonfined to aooldenta reeultlng In Injury t0, or death or, human beinga. It8 ridd 18 not to ineure Mr. D. W. Stakes, Page #a. againet loe8 or damage to property, though oocasloned by acof- dent." "*Casaalty Ineuranoe' are words of quite freqU8nt~843, yet it oamot be said that their deiinftion ha8 been very aocurately eettled by the courts. Strlotly and literally *casualty* 18 perhapr to be limited to inJurIes whloh arise solely from aooidsnt wIthout any element of eon- SOiOUS human design Or Intentional human agency; Or, 88 it 18 8~eth8 eXpre86ed, ineVit8bl8 acoldent, somethbg not to be foresean or guarded agalmt. But in ordfnary uaage 'ea8ualty,' like *aooIdant,* is quits oommonly applied to 108808 and inlarlaa rhloh happen suddenly, an8xpeotsdly, not in the u8ual oour8e of eve&e, and without de- dgn on part or the psreon surfsring rrcnu the Injury." Bankera' Wtnal Ca8nalty Co. vs. Plrat National Bank or Council Bluris, 108 N.W. 1040, Wl Iowa 456. Oenaral Casualty companies may be lnOOrpOr8tid under the provisiona of Artlole 4989, Raflsed Statutes, and may Include in their articles of lnoorpcuatlon any'one or all of the eleven purpoasrranrrmsratedin 8ald Artiola, a8 well as other8 if authorized by Saotlon 12 thereof. Seotlon 2 reads: nfo lnaure against loss or damage msult- lng fraa looldant to or Injury auetalned by an saploye or other person for whioh aooident or injury tha aaaamd 18 liable.* Under this Seotlon the ocapany may write lnauranoe against llablllty for personal InJmy aq8talned by an am- aloye mmltlng from aooldant, soomonly known as *employ- 8r*8 llablllty lnsuranoe.a It may al80 insure againat liability ror InJuries to persona other than employee resulting frocll aoolUent for whloh the assured ia liable. Seotion 8 provIde8r To lneiuroagainst 1088 or damagaa resdt- lng from aooldont to or injury aulisred by any person rot wbloh 1088 and dapuge the Inrrured 18 llabl88 sxoeptlng smployerriliablllty insor- anc8 a8 authorized ander Subdivision 2 of this htiOi8.” . . !.:r. D. X. Stakes, Page #7. Under this Seotlon the oompany may write the sent) kind of in8UranOe provided for in Section 2, except employer's lIabIlIty Inauranoe. The Inauranoa written under sections 2 and 8 may be properly oalled "lIabllIty Insuranoe.* Seotlon 5 reads: "To insure against 1088 from injury to person or property which reerults8OCident8lly from steam boilers, elevators, eleotrioal derioes, engines and all maohlnery and applI#anoe8 USed in oonneotion themwlth or operated thsreby; and to lnsum boilers, elevators, eleotrloal devloe8, en&m, mschlnery and applianoee." The polloy under oonslderation, while written by a foreign 0011pany,evidently with a permit to do bU8In888 in this State, is one oorerizg both injury to property and/ to any person sustained a8 a result.ot an ecoldent. It embraoea both oasualty and llabIllty olau8e8, suoh as may be written under Seotlon 6, quoted above. It 18 apparent that the ln8nranoe for which the Coa- peny has oontmoted to pay loss on the assumd*s property ~iI~~~~eoooa8iOn8d by aooldsnt 18 oasudlty, not lIablllty Themrom, the premium on said polloy oannot be legall; paid out of an appropriation to pay Wllablllty In8uranoe.* The Leglslatnre la presumed to have known the dliferenoe between the two ends of insurance and the obamotar of rI8k8 belonging to each. While ue hate dsoided that the olalm for the pre- mium on this polloy oannot be paid out of the approprla- tioa reterred to, aad that the 8ame wa8 properly refused by the Caiptrollsr, ue will dlsou8s th8 ohamoter of the insurance smbrao8d in Seotloaa S, 4, and 6. If it be oonoeded that the ObligatIoa afi8umedby the company la said Seotion8 may be olassed as "lIabIllty insuranoe," then auoh obllgetione are ab8OlUtely ralus- less to the aseured tor maooa8 which we wIl1 aow oon8ider. In the first plaos, the aotual beneflolary 18 not the wTexaa Prison Board and/or Texas Prison System and/or It.8 Eleoted or Appointed Oiiloerr,a but the State Of Texas. It is the State's property that la desorlbed ln the policy end it would be It8 property that would be damaged Or ):I-. D. W. St8k88, Page #8. destroyed In the event of an aooldent. The olalm ror the premium is againet the State's funde. The State of Terse should have been named In the polloy ao tha "A88UCad." The ioregolag statement, of oouree, appllea to the polloy as a whole. Under Seotioaa 3 and 4, the Company is only obligated to pay to tha A68urad (whloh wa mutit aseums is the Stats Of Texam) auoh amounts 66 the A88Ured shall beoome obll- cats4 to pay by reason oi its lIabllIty for 1086 on the property or Others, or ror parson61 injUrh8 to Other8, eto. The 6rrtt0t or this agmwneat IS that if thera Is no llabIllty oa the part or the State, there la aona on the part oi the Oampany. Tha Ompaay Is only obllgat- ed to pay to the State or to thO86 who suffer loss under tha teams oi the oontraot auoh auras as the State shall b8 obligated to pay by reason of its llablllty to auoh third rmr8oaa. It la now the astabliahad~law or this State that tha Stat6 la aot liable for the torte or nagllgenoa oi Its OrriOerB,-agents or 68nanta engaged in the periormsnoa or a gotenuseatal fiaotlon uhlaaa it has rirst axpra8aly 886tUUed auah llabIlIty. Brook v. State, 58 6. W. (2d) 534, error reruaad; Gothsr v. State at al, 106 8. W. (Zd) 1104, and the authorities there oltad. Suoh liability, the State has navar assumed. Brooks 'I.State, aupr8. It has provided Uorbaen*a Caapomatlon Iaauranoe ior oer- tala olanaae oi tha Highway Dspartmaat*a employaa, (Art. 66746 et 88q., Vornoa'a Texas Btatutsa, 193S Supp.) rhloh statutes hare no lpplloatloa here. The emotion aad operation 0r prlaona and jalla, whathar by tha Stats, a oounty or a munlolpallty, is purely a governmental runo- tlon, being an lndlapaaaabla part of the admin- iatratlon or the orlmlnal law." Corbatt v. St. Vlnoant*a Industrial Sohool.,177 N. Y. 16, 68 N. E. 997; 21 R.C.L. 1168. It la also a wall established ale of law that in tha abaaaoa ol a statute, a state la not liable to a oonviot ror InjurIea luatalaad by him as a result of the neuli- genoe 0r a prison employe, whether the oonviot is working OUt8i.46or Ins148 the place Of iJRprI8o!Iment.clodrelter t!r. D. W. Stnkes, Fage #O. VB. State, 80 N. C. 51, 41 Am. Rep. 440; Lewis '1. State, 96 N. Y. '71,41 Am. Rep. 607; 21 R. C. L. 1182. Should an "aooIdentR oocur to the "object8R ineumd, resulting la loss or property to others, in lnjurlea to ooavIota, 8mploye6, and to other persons, what la the State's llablllty? wAooldentm is an event whloh ha8 happened wlthout a party.8 romelght or foreknowledge or without "fault- ai the person who is ohargad. It is a oatastropha tiloh has oooumd wlthout wnegligenoe" oa the Part of either party. SO Tex. hr. 693, Sec. 20. In the case of Dallas RaIlray & TermIn Co. '18.Allen, 43 6. 1. (2d) 165, 170, error dbm.issed, the oourt aaid: -By looldent 18 meant auoh an unaXpaOt8d oatastrophe as oooura without any aas* being to blema ror it; that la, without anybody's being guilty of.aegllgeaoe in doing or per-. mlttlng to be done or amittlng to do the particular thing that 04N8ed auah aaaualty.w The rule or non~llablllty ror parson81 injuries reoelved or damages to property auetained as result Of aoaldent is utnounoed by the OoawileaionOf Appeal in the case of Eberaole ~8. Sapp, 206 9. W. 156, to be: "33 the injury reaultl%g rrom the aot could have been reasonably antlolpated or foreeesa by an ordinary prudent Parson, la the axeralaa of ordluary oam, the oaaurmnoe la aot aaol- dental. It, however, the injury oould not have been romeseen or aatlalpeted, it Is an aooldant ror whloh them 18 no legal redm88.” When an acoldent oooura resulting in lnjnry to Pro- perty or person there la ao legal lIabIlIty oa the part Or any one, hanoa no legal redress. Therefore, it nabmal- ly rollae that the Stats would not be liable ior dasrage done to propsrty owned by another, or for pereonal lnjur- lea sustained by its employee oonvlota, or any other person as a reeult 0r aa aaooldent;w whether auah aooldent wa8 unavoidabla or due to negligence. Thererote, under all seCtIons, exoept No. 1, of tha policy, II the state u,-.3. T. St8ke8, Page #lo. IS not 80 liable, the Company 18 not liable. The proteatlon rhloh the polloy attempt8 to give the State is no protection whatever. Should the State pey the prcmlum, It would pay for only a 8UppO8ed protection, aomethlng It does not get, does not need, and already h88 beOaU88 Of it8 sovereignty. State v. Bnmnan et ux, 111 9. W. (24) 347, error refueed. You are advieed that It Is OUT opinion thet the premium on the polloy Under aonaIderatIoa nraynot be legally paid from the atxrrentappropriation made to the Texas Prlaoa system to pay alIabIllty insurance pr8mIum8.W Yours very truly