.
Mrs. 8. 8. Sapp, DIrector uukExecutlva Secretuy
Touhsr Ret~remellt Syrtom of Tour
fiustia, Teur
Dear Mrs. Sapp: Opinion Numbs; O-3434
R;r: Pqrnoitt of lcurnuMsd con-
tributions of member of
Tcacber ketlrrmsat System
who died bsfors retbanent.
We have received your letter of recent data la which
you ssk the oplalon of tbfs depsrtaasnt oa s question concsrnh~ ths
proper person to whom the accumulated coatributlons of a dscoucd
member of tbr Tcsehsr Rcttremsnt System should k psfd.
.,~I
Subssctfon 6. Section S, of the Tmukr Retlremrat Act
(Article 29221, Vs~aoa’s Aaaot&sd Civil Statukr) coatdam tba fol-
lowing prorlsioal
“Sh o u ld l memb er dk before ntiro-
mcn$ tbs unouut of his lecumul&ed coatributloas
standing to ths credit of his individual occouat slW1
be psid ss provlded br ths lsws of descent and dis-
tribution Of T~T.M ualess he hss dlneted tkt sccouat
to be pad othexriss.~
State; Cecil8 Mary Wattem iu a member of tha Tseclaer
Rotlmment Systan. Vader the suthotit7 of ths lbeve qootad provisioa
she desipated as bsrrfieiary ‘Rwennd Mothsr Bonsventun Geaarsl..
After Sister Cecile’s death, but kfon the monsy could bs paid to
Rovsrend Mother BOBWOPtUT4, the Reverend Mother died.
Revsrend Mother Boasventure was Superior Gaaersl of
the congzapsttoa of the SMerm of Charity of tbs htsrasts Word, l
Chtholic nl!glous order which bss Its bssdquaztors la Ssa Antonio,
Text. Reverend Mother Bonweature was her rellglow nuno. Her
SUCC~~~O~in office es Supertor General is Rennad Met&t L4wrkn.
YOU with to kaow wbetlwr tbs contrlbutioas should bs paid to Reverend
k(Qthc? LueAu or to the heirs Of Reverend Mother Boasuattm, ss-
sun&g sbs died tatestate, undsr our st&utes of descent and dirtribution.
Tttle 46, Vsrnon’s Annotated Civil St+teq Cptaioa No. o-2009.
Mrs. B. 8. S~PP. P~V 2.
He cuauot glvs s CatAgoric ulawor to your qwrttcm.
In the first place, tbir department 5s aot smpowrred to pasr upon
questions of feet. In ths second place, we have ken unable to find
my COWS dirsctly In pofat. However, ia view of the conelusloa
which w reach. a c ~tsg o r ic lnswr 5s not aeessssry.
we beliuve that it ts proper to rmsort to eats involving
tbs constructlea of wills aad to draw aa saology between those ~ssss
and the sltustion radar eons5dsrat5oa.
It 5s wll sstabl5~hsd that 5f under s will A bensf5ciary
5s aot designatsd with prseisioa, or 5f the dssignstioa 5s underteh
or amb5guous,sxtr5nsle evidence or circumstances surrounding
the testator may be relorted to ia order to 5dsat5fy the Icgstss or
devissc. Lightfoot v. Poindoxtsr (U‘rit of error nfuocd), 199 S.W.
1152; Lsdd v. Xhitledge (Writ of error refused), 205 S.W. 463;
Methodist C:rphtige of Waco v. Buckads Orphms’ Home of Dallas,
at al. (Writ of error dismissed), 261 S.K. 203; 69 CJ. 152; 44 TexJur.792.
we quota the followiag from the opiaioa of ths court 5a
Ladd v. Whitlsdge, suprat
*It5s compstcnt to ldm5t psrol
evidence, as it 5s somet5mes, though not vary
accurately lxprsesed, to explalo a w5ll (or
et&r written kstrument) by showhg tbs
sltut5oa of the testator ia his reX&ion to
perroam and th5ags armad h5m. or, as it Is
often expxsrsed, by proof of the surroamdiag
drcumstmsss, la order that his will may
be read in tha light of tbs eircxmstuues in
rhleh hs WBSplaced at ths time of -Mae it.
His intentmust be 4scert4iasd trern thr me--
iag of the words ia tbs iastrxmeat, and from Thor
words ~Xoas; but, aa b may be supposed to have
uesdlangublle WithNfO~aCetOths liht~tiollh
which ha was placed to the et&e of his f&y,
his property, sd other circamstuaes rekttag
to hlmsslf iadividually, aad to his affsirs, the
lbw admits eatrixwie lvfdence of there facts
amj circumstances to lnabk ths court to dls-
cover thr muniag attached by ths Ustatorr ts
the wrdr used 5a tbs w5il, aad to spply tbsm
to the particuler fwtr of ths C&se. For this pur-
pose, every materlrl fret thst will eaabls the
Court to idSaltily tb. p8?SOM O? thiSlg* PMIL-
tioasd In the tnstrsment la sdmissibbls, ia or&r
to piece the court, whoss provia- it is to ds-
tsrm5ae the mesalag of the words, as near as
may be, in the situation of ths testrtor, when he
used them in maltta~ his will..
.
Mrs. 8. B. Sapp, page 1.
la the ease of Crubb v’. Aadsrooa (lb’rlt of error dis-
miusd) 3g S.w.(2d) 647, the court had befors it ths conotructioa
o f l wffl. The court, speaking through ths press& Chief Justice
of our Supreme Court, used tbe follow5ag laaguager
‘* l lThe courts in dstermiaing
the in4 nt of the tsstator w5ll look to ths
language used ia the purported will, hio
rituetion at the t5ms of the maNag thereof,
as well as his conduct with rsfersncs thereto
thereafter *+l.”
“+ l *It 5s trus that par01 ttstknoay
5s no t ldmissibls to ceatradict ths terms of
a will aor to show aa 5ntention evidencedby
other ltigwge not used thereia, yet extrinsic
lvidsacs 50 admissibls to show ths situation
of ths tertator ia relation to psrrons bnd
thirys around htm ia order Chat his wU1 my’
bs read ia the ltght of ths circumstmcss in
which bs warn plaud at the time of making
it, The Xaw admits such testimony to enable
the court to discovsr the msaaing attached ’
br ths brstator to tba words used la W will,
and for this purpose everymaterial fact that
w5U enable tbo court to 5dest5fy the person
or things mentioasd ia ths instrument is bd-
missibls in order ts plus tbs court in tbs
situatloa of the tss8or when bs used the words
in the w5xLw
And our Su rem8 Court La the came of Harsell et al,, v.
Frey et al., ll? S.W.(Ld 5 413, meds the followfag statement.
% order io lscertaio tbs intention
of ths tsstator exprsssed ha wU1, the lurgurge
ustd therein may bs eonstrued b toraection
with thl e
urrouad5ag facts and eircnmstaaeer
sx5rting at the time the will w88 mub. lf neces-
suy, per04 bstimoay may be heard to gathsr
tke trse Lotkatlon of the tsstator l spressed in
gucb w5llt urd such 5ntsatioa, 5f lsgrl, must pn-
VbU:
See tiso Federal Land Bask of Hcuston v. Little (Com..App.)
107 s.w.(Ld) 3741Ellet v, MeCord (Writ of error rsfussd), 41 S.W. (2d) ~
110.
I.’
.
Mrs. 8. B. Sspp, psg8 4.
As w hsvs heretofore meatlonsd, the dsslg~t5on In
question wss to ‘Revsrend Mother Bonsvtnturc Gsnerel.. Jiswrend
Mother Bomronture was her r4ligiou8 nune. ‘Cknsral” obvlously
referee to the off5cs of Superlor General. You wish to know whether
it ws8 intsndsd by the member tbat ths coatrlbutlone were to ba pdd,
Lo tbs event of her daub, to Reverend hiother Bonsvechue~er aa in-
dividurl or to ths psrson holding the office of Superior General. He
bellsve th8t there is sufficiaat UMeTtainty, & vlsvc of the foregoing
sutbor5tie8, to suthorlu the faacbar Retksmsat Bosrd to rerort to
cxtrlnric lvldsncs 5s order to ekrlfy the dssignst5oon.
SLtrr C4cUe ‘liao l nPuarb4r of ths congrsgatlon. Ml
members of ths conpregatloa tshe Vow8 bf poverty upon becoming
mamkrs sad lre unable under the lrws of ths church to own ‘say
propsrty ladlvidually. The fact8 may #how that Sister Cede as a
member of the congregrtlon wss cognlraut of the church rules at
the t5me of the design&ton. rod thus knew that lbc lhwrend tiother
could own no property lndlvlduslly. Tbls would ccrtslaly 5ndicsts
sa intention to designate the offks o r lucc4asor ia off5cs rether
thsn the tndtvldusl e8 such. .
We 818 informed thrt the congre&stion is WiuLtg to
provide sn lndsmaity sgrcement fully protcctlng tvcryona spslast
lll Dsbllity, You are respscffully edvlsed thst rbould t.k+ Tescher
Retirement Soard make such l determination 88 outlined ln ths
preceding parsgrsph, you would bs luthorisod to pay the eoatrlbu-
tion8 to Reverend Mother ~Ls8crien, Superior Geusral of the. Congre-
gstion of the Sister8 of Cb8rity of Incarnate Word. Such en bdemaity
sgreement would protect ths Board from furthsr llsbfllty.
Vsry’truly yours,
A~TURNEYGENERALOFiEXAS
a/ George W. Sparks
BY G4orge iK. bpsrks
hSSi#tut
APPROVED AEG If,1942
o/ GROVER SELLERS
FiRST ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENXXAL
SWIstvmb
APPROVED
ePP;13N CGMMiTTEE
BT ,i’. RWG,CXAXRMAN