OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
r CDPmaan
aoheol
one-halfthere-
at withoutan
tat&ear ulted2tE
on as state&
the moon6 decisionof
l 7731, countySahml
vs* Mstrie% Traotersof
rht ~00.8, in whbh ahe sw-
1 Chapter339, A&a 1935,
that Seotian2 of Artiole
, lat 0. a., pa 259, ch.
f, Aats 1929, 4lst LogUt-
worn to be aan8truod to-
gether. The%6 &.Ut6, Of course,relateronly to tha eh8ng*
of bouadaz4eror detaohlngtozvf,tory from schooldletriota
a* 15mltedby the plwrlslonnthere5la set Qut. rrQvfrlaa18
made for the aonmlidatlonof eoamncm rahooldS.strlota, cam-
man county liao dlstrlotrand independents&o01 dfstrlote
._
, :
Sonortnble
IkmnanPPickele,
Page 2
by Article 27&h, 3ectlm 5b, VernOnksReoissdCivil stat-
utes, and Articrle
2806, Rwieed Civil Statutesof 192!5+
SeatLtmfjb01 Artlole2742b, 6upra,rolateato th* OonaOli-
daticnof rchcoldlrtriotsby eleotion&&adplwvmw that
they ehallbo oonduotedinthenwnerprea~bu%by~eaersl
lva in Article2806, RevisedCivil Statutes,1925.
wrthave Qatuiarad carem* pur opinionrequest
snd tbaproBlsanthem3a&wesented. slaoe la have been uu-
able to find auy at8tutergauthurityfor the prceedureout-
linedand r~ated, it i8 th oplnlanoi this depwtwnt
that the quo&&m w hove shted must be ansvemd in the
negative*
Ycure very truly
ATTORSEYos66RALOF.TaxAs
i
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion