c OPY
Zsnoreble L. D. Eatliff, yTr.
County Attorney
Dickens County
Spur, Texas
Dear Sir:' Opinisn No. O-3138
i?e: Conpensat;ionof the county
judge for presiding over
the Commissioners' Court.
Your recent request for an opinion of this depart-
ment on the above stated,subJect has been received.
We quote from your letter as follows:
"The Cowty Judge af Dickens County, Texas
has requested me to secure from your Depertment
an opinion concernifighis compensetion for pre-
siding over the 'Comndssioner'sCourt, and he
has prepared, and I hand you herewith, a brief
on this question.
"For your information I~have a copy of
your opinion No. 0-lC17."
Your brief reads as follows:
Vlease give us an opinion of the~following
statezent or^ acts:
"Dic'kensCounty is s.county of
(7,SG4--parenthesis ours) population ac-
ccrdizg to the census of 1940, EM its officers
ore psi;?on a fee basis. Is the county
judge thereof, who receives a salary of
$lEC.CC per month for the county, entitled
tc additional compensation for &se_?(?iythat
:IcnorableL. D. Datliff, Jr., Page 2
he actually serves as chairman of the
Commissionersq Court thereof?
Section 3 cf Article 3926, H. C. S. as hmended,
resds'as follows:
"*Tar presiaing over the Commissicners'
Court, -
ordering elections and making retilrns
thereof,.hearing snd deterrinirg civil
causes, If any, and transacting all ot,her
official business not ctherwise provided
for, the Cou.ntyJudge shail receive such
salary frc:i:
the County Treasury as the
Co:~%iseioners*Court may allow him by
order, payable monthly from the general
funds of the county, provided, that in
counties~having ~$290,000,000.00'assessed
valuation, or more, and which have estab-
lished therein institutions for the care
of both dependent and delinquent boys
and girls, the County Judge shall receive
as ex-officio salary, not to be accounted
for as fees of office,~and,in addition
to all amounts allowed under.the b5aximum
Fee Bill, the further sum of #3,000.00
per annum, payable monthly out of the
general funds of the county.'
":leare well aware of your opinion No. O-1017
which states that the County .~- Judqe of Willacy
CouIlty, who was receiving $195.00 per month kx-
officio, was not entitled to an additional fee
for presiding over 'the Commissioners* Court.
"It is to be observed however that in
the case of Nillacy County the County Judge -ijould
receive in ex-'officiothe sum oft$2380 per
year which is only 320.00 less than'the total
of ;;2400.00provided for in Article 3883,
sec. 1, K. C. S. as amended. 'VEEFXASthe County
Judge of Dickens County will receive in
ex-officio only .$19X0for the year and his
fees of officr;together with the ex-officio
'"140Q.00,
~511 no? net hi.12
.+ therefore the situation
Bonorable L. D. Ratlifr',Jr., Page 3
in Dickens county is different from that in
'iiillacy
County.
"Article 3926, referred to above, read.s
3na can be interpreted the same as Article
2450, R. C. S., 1895, which statute was ccn-
strued;~and t.hescr;eGuesticn raised in that
case as is now under ccnsideration. In that
case and construction, namely, Farmer,
County Treasurer vs. Shaw! 93 Texas Reports
43S-445, Chief Justice Gaines held that the
County Judge is entitled to additional com-
pnsaticn for presidi~ngover the Com!tAs-
sioners* Court, etc. As far as we can tell
t,hiscase has neverbeen overruled, and in
spite~of the fact that the reading of the
statute has been changea some, no material
alteration has beer?mtideand the construc-
.*..
tion is similar d.s to the point under con-
,/'. sideration. It is our opinion therefore
that the rule laid'dozn by Chief Justice
Gaines in Farmer, County Treasurer vs.
Shaw, should apply to Dickens County and
that t.heopinion of your Department Rum-
berea O-1017 is not in conflict because of
the exorbitant ex-cfficio salary allowed
in the case',ofViill~cyCounty."
Article 3895, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes,
reads as follows:
"The Commissioners1 Court is hereby de-
allowing compensation for.ex-
barred fror:.
officio services to county o~fficielswhen the
ccripensationan~dexcess fees which they are
allowed to retain shall reach the maximum
provided for in this chapter. In cases
where the compensation and excess fees which
the officers are ailolvedto retain shall.not
reectithe maximum provided for insthis chap-
ter, the Commissioners' Court shall allow
cor;pens~ationfor ex officio services when,
in their judgr;;ent,such compensation is
necessary, provided, such compensation for
Honorable L. C. Ratliff, Jr., Page 4
ex officio services allowed shall not ih-
crease the conpensation of the cfficial
beyond the r!a.xiakm
cotipensaticnand excess
fees aliofiedto be retained ‘oybin under
this chapter;. Provided, however, the ex-
officio h;creir.
authorized shall be allmed
only after an opportunity for a public
hearing end only upon the affirmative
vote of at least three ker;:bers
of the COD
L3issioners'Court."
The only statute now in force referring directly
to compensation for a county judge presiding over the COD
missioners' Court is subdivisicn 3, Article 3926, supra.
We have carefully,considered the case of FarEer
v. Shaw, 93 Tex. 43S, 54 S:W. 772, 55 S. W.~l115, but do
not think that this case governs or controls the questicn
here icvolved.
In the above menticned case the court had under
consideration Articles 2450 and 2466, R. S. ,1895,Article
2450, which authorized the Ccmissioners* Court to allow
the county judge a salary for ex officio services, read
as follows:
"For presiding over the comissioners
court, ordering elections and making returns
thereon, hearing and detemining civil causes,
and transacting all other official busioess
not otherwise provided for, the county judge
shall receive such salary fron the county
treasurer as ;;iay
be allov~ec?
him by order of
the cormiseioners court."
firticle2466 read as follovm:
"Zach county commissioner, and tee county
judge .&en acting as such, shall receive from
the county treasure:, to be paid on order of
t.hecozziseicners court~,the sun:of three
dcl.larsfor esch day he is engaged in holding
of'the co:izissionerscourt, but SUC?_
a teri;;
comzissicners shall receive no pay for hold-
ihg zore thaa one sy~ecinlterm of their court
per niohth."
Honorable L. D.Ratliff, Jr., Rage 5
In discussing the two above mentioned stxtutes,
the court said:
n
. . .s
'Be do not think there is a conflict
between i.hesetwo statutes, and it is apparent
to us that the purpose was to allow the county
judge an extra cor;;,7ensaticn as presiding offi-
cer of the coiznissionerscsurt, and that by
virtue of article 2466, he should receive
cotipensstionas a ;neGberof the cozzissioners
court. That article expressly includes the
county judge as entitled to three dollars a
day as compensation v&en he is engaged in
holding a tez of court. By virtue.of the
constitution and the statutes thereunder,
he is made a member of the coszissioners
court and the purpose of the law evidently
was to entitle him to compensation for the
see services .renderedby other coinmissioners,
and additicnal compensation for presiding
over that body. The.legislature evidently
thought the county judge, as the presiding
officer, was burdened with more duties when
sitting with the coaissioners court than
the commissioners, and the purpose was evident-
ly, by article 2450, to allow him some com-
pensation for these extra services. Viewing
the two sections of law in this way, we think
they can be reconciled. .~.."
At the present, we have no statute such as Article
2466, supra, specifically providing a certain coqpensation
for the county judge when presiding over the Commissioners'
Court. It is true that Article 3926, Vernon's Annotated
Civil Statutes, contains, substantially, the same language
as Article 2450, supra, but, as above stated, there is no
statute such as Article 2466 now in force and effect. It
is evident from Tour letter that the county officials of
Dickens County are compensated on a fee basis, and in.
addition to the fees of.office, the county judge receives an
ex officio compensation of 3160.00 per month. We think
that Article 3895 and Article 3926, supra, must be con-
sidered tcgether, and it must be keRt in mind that it is
the established law of this state that "an officer nay not
,
Konorable L. D. Ratliff, Jr., Page 6
claim or reach any money without a law authorizing him to
do so, and clearly fixing the amount to which he is entitled."
34
_.Tex. Jur.
_ _511. In other
. _ words, an officer may not
claim a fee for a particular service rendered unless,the
statute has prescribed a fixed fee for said service. This
is the rule;even though the fee or compensation fixed is
unreasonable~or inadequate. An officer may be required by
law to perform specific services or discharge additional
duties for which no compensation is provided. 34 Tex. Jur.
pp. 530, 531.
The $160.00 monthly ex officio conpensaticn al-
lowe,dby the CorcJissioners'court compensates the county
judge for presiding over the Commissioners' Court, order-
ing elections and making returns thereof, and transacting
all other official business not otherwise provided for.
Therefore, you are respectfully advised that it is our
opinion that the County Judge of Dickens County is not
entitled to additionalcompensation for presiding over
the Commissioners* Court.
Trusting that the foregoing fully answers your
inquiry, we are
Yours very truly
ATTORXZY GEBEML OF TEXAS
By S. Ardell Williams
Assistant
AW:GO
APPROVED FEB. 15, 1941
S. GERALD C. Iv&E
ATTORNEY GERERAL OF TEXAS
APPROVED OPINION COUWCTEE
BY S. EW'B,CHAIRMAN