Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

\ ‘.i +> ,.-a OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 1.3 AUSTIN Honorable Jno. Q. ?&Adams commissioner Department 0r Banking Austin, Texas Dear Sir: t of the amount of on the above stated oovsrs33 in sohedule form. i . form bond may be written for this we would like to know the smount f’or whioh such’bood shoud be made.” The provision of the Banking Code oited in your letter reeds as follows: _. :..” _. 783. _ Boaorabls Jno. Q.- XaAdaw Pam 2 The Couxaissioner, then Deputy Commlasioner, the Departmental Zxamiaer the Liquidating Supervisor, and eaoh sx and ner, assistant ex- aminer, and speoi’al agent’, the Building'an% Loan Supervisor and esoh building and loan examiner and each other offiaer and, employee apacified by the Commiasionar shall, before entering upon the .dutisa of his office; take an oath of offioe and make a fidellt bond i lo the sum of Ten .Thourand Dollars (~4 lO,OOO.OO) nayable to ths Governor of the State of Texas. ana his auooesaors~in offloe, in indiridual; W schedule. or blanket form, cxeouta by a suretl aDpeering upon the list of apEnovea Wreties acesptsbis to the Units&I Stat& Government. Any bond provided under this artiole shall be on a form approved by the T’inanca Coobniaeioa. The pramiuma far aaoh bonds shall be paid out of tha fund6 ap,propriatad for. the.opsratioa cf the Banking Department~~(?..phasis added) Aa oan readily be aesn, the atatute expressly authorizes the use of a blanket form of bond, subject-- as Is the ease whether the bond be, Individual’, aoheduie or blanket--to th8 requuirsment, that t&s form of saoh bond be approved by the Finance Commission orsated by the new Solking Code. Your firat question is tharefora answered in the affirmative. The plain intsndment of the.above statute is that , a fidelity bond in the aaounf of $10 000 ahall 009er thr aots of each of the oZ?loera and empi oyees enumerated therein ao that, in the event of the &efaloation of any or all of auoh persons, reoovery map be had up to this amountfor each of the Erring individuals. .Statad diffarentlp, the puipose of the statute is to proteot the State from the malfesaanoe of the petaona named therein to the extent of ,$lO,OOO for eaoh suoh person, regardless of when saoh malfeasanoe shall ooour~and regardless of the oiroumstaaoes under which it shall take plaoe. The rollowing examplea will perhaps s0r9e to make this clear: (a) Zither A or 3 or C alone eznbezxlaa $10,000 and 15 immediately dateotsd, t. . 784 xonoraBl4 anor Q. mudarm, wee 3 1 (b) A, B and,C, aotlng la oonorrt or at the mm4 ' the, sash embexzl6 $10,000 and -8 i5amdlatsly dsteeted. (0) A embezelee $10,000 and his aot remains uudrteobed; B subasqusntly ambexxlea a like amount and he too is unapprehended; 0 later fe guilty of like aotion, but at this time all three 4mhea2l4- nents we dlaootersd. Ia our opinion, the pm 086 of the Statute was to afford full and oomplatb protsot Pon.to the State in eaoh of the situations lllu8trated above, end in similar situations, Ii a bond oorsring A, B aud C ehould, be exeauted Only for the sum of $10 COO, 8aOh Of 3uch p8rfiOnS would, in one 881148, be cover84 by a $10,000 bond, sin04 a raaoterp Of this a!QOUXttcould bd haa in'the 8V8nt that aX#' oll4 Of thm should violate the oonditlona of the bond. Thus full oovera&e would result in th4 situation llluatrated in (a) abOt8. UorooTer, ii A alone should 8mb82218 ~10,000 and if this amount should be rsoorersd on thd bond, a new ‘bond of #lO,OOO would be neoeesary to rsplaoe th4 impaired security and suoh n8w bond aould be avsllable if % alonr or C alone should subssqnsntly be guilty of like aotlon. Rowetor, It is apparent that such a bond would la no w afford in11 proteotion in the situations illustrated In (b"i ad (o), for the mariama liability OS the surety of such bond would be but $10,000 regardless of how many dsfsl- oatlons should ocour and regardles~a of the extent thereof. Tbos, in (b) and (0) the Stats oould reaomr but .$lO,OOO despite the faot that,its total 104684 were $30,000. Ir w4 oould aaaume that poaalble malfeasors will a&i ShI&y and in l8qU8DO8, with each suooeedlng pereon waiting until hla pr,edeoaaror hea bsen apprehendsd and until ths impaired aaourity has again been built up to $10,000, a b.>nd of this mount would oonfom to the purpose of the statute, Obvl.~usly, however, no auoh assumption is tenable. To aa28 ior eituationo of ths typo illustrated In (b) and (0) abora, and siiallar situaticnr, it ia neoesaary that the bond-be one which oovms each individual to the extent of $10,000 re$ardleaa of nbsn ho aots' and regardless 0r the action of hls r4110m. ainoe we 434 not authorlaed to presorlbr the rorm of suoh bond, no do cot hero ettempt to stats pr48184ly what the ‘iamount of such bond shell bs. Perhaps it will be 04044- sery for ths emu.&t or the bond to be that craount wi~ioh is obtained bg a<iplyiag ;3lO,OOO ~bp the amber of persons to ‘be Inoluded in the bout% Cn the other tend, p&mps It wi3.l be :oseible to obtain. a bead rhio2 nhili, bearing a is00 mount of but $10,000 or saw SM in SXOBSStheeof will norerthelrss be oonditianed in suoh o w that the neoaasar eorsrs@ will be ObMinrd. u"onsaqueatly, we z~r1y:mable to gi TB d aaimwriosl xmw? GO ytur sseond question. 3swm%r, in aprmer to mob question, you am ?rspefMull~ addrised that th0 tueiWt Of the bond auwt .ba auoh that under the SoMitiOn8 thsreof p+a- tsotion~to the extent of P,10,000 will In all oircu~stmoes be sff?3ded the Stats against t4e yxslbls tisdaeda ai each iadlviduel covared by the.bond. l'?Usttn& that. the t4T8gOiilg Sat~S2hOtOril~ &UW3 yaw ia31iri48, we ere Yours very truly