OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Ron. A. A. Miller
County Attorney
Rlswton~
county
mwton, %n-ns
,onthe above stated
question has
lieved ix-m all
The commlssiomtrs~
1111 0rfi0er8 t0
y understanding
'binthe'law when
one oan objeot to
at signed it arter
5998,,$001 an& 6002, R,.C, 8. r&tad6s
The oftiofal bond of eaoh
offloer shall be exsautbd by U with two
or,nore good and 8ufffoient sureties or a
solvent surety 0-y authorlead to do busi-
ness la this 8?iata.
'W-t.6002 hysumtyonanyoffl-
olel bond 0-rany oolmty offlof3r may apply to
the 0amrl~~i0m~8 00nrt t0 b9 r0iwt9a f20m
hiaaonn, amlth00ount~010rlr shall thsrertpon
lofme ~a notice to nalitoffloer nith a oopy
of the app&,ioatlon,which *hali be ~ellrodupon
s&l ~Sftoar by the oheriit or any oonatable
ai the county, azU said atfleer 80 notiffed
ehaU,upansuchssrvloagaOaetoereralsath6
funut%onsof his c&floe, exoept to preserve
anyreomda crprcpertylnhifs~oharge,and in
o&se of a sherYr or ocmntable,to keep ~xQon-
em, pronema tho peaoe and exwute vmrrante
o? arrest, and his off100 @tall bemme raoant
unlesshe@eanmbom&nfthlntwentydays
l'raathetime ofxwmlringswhnctlee, fi
a .nm bond is glrtm anIlappxove6, &he fomttr
6uretlss shall bs Iliaobmged frcm any uPbil%ty
for the ralsoomlwtor the ~r%noipalafter tl#
approvalef th0 nenrbcn&
"ArL 6QO& When the owadeeloners 00&t
beames SatiafleQthat the bmd of any uouzity
omaex v&%oh ha.8been
require a new bend or additi& sealtrityto
be given. 8&u ~0~2% nhall oawe ekeid tef’ifaer
to be ofted Cc appear at a tq of their ocurt
not 1tcWthan five days al%er serpioe, and
shall take swh a&ion a8they de- heat for
the puhlto intore&;, and their &oiston eha3.l
be final and no appeal shall Ue thernfz%nn."
%Qer the pmvialonn of the ebcve qucteQ stn-
tuton, when the otiaefon~' oeurt .beooneesatlstied
that the bend oi any oounty oiiioer whloh has been approved
by it tar any cause is lnauffiolent they aim33 requ%re
a new hond or aMitiomx1 seourity and that the 'orflae or
offloes t3hallbeoom vaotmt Unless the offfoer or Offi-
at)273give a n8w bontlwithin tmantp day8 ftftsr 5eTptoe
a8 mvlded in the statute.
Hon. A. A. I:Iller,Page 9
The matter of U8termInIng whether or not the
bonds of county offloiale are from any aause fnanfti-
clent '8 within the dlsoratlon of tht oommisslonar~*
court, and the oommIasloners* court hae authority end
It Is wIthIn their dleoretion to determine whether or mt
they shall rsclulrea new bond or additional seourlty
to be given.
The aomm18sionere1 court may order a new bond
by and upon their own motion or upon application ror a
eu.retyto be relieved. Se8 the 08888 Of State VS. W811S,
61 Tex. 56 and Flnoh vs. State, 9 9W 08.
You are reapeotf'ullyadvlsed that It Ie the
opinion of this department that the oo5Iseloners~ oourt
did not act beyond its authority in giving notioea t0
other officers to make n8w bonds. You (LT8further ad-
vised that when the oomm.lerrionsrs*
oourt beoomee satf8-
fled that a bond of any oounty offioer whloh ha8 been
approved by It Is from any oauee IneuffioIant, it ~@y
require a new bond or additional ssourlty to be given
upon it0 own motion.
Trusting th:t the foregoIng answers your in-
quiry, we remain
Yours very truly
ATTORNEYOENERAL OFTEXAS
BYUdL
Ard811 wI11iemS
Assistant
ATTORNEY GENF
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion