Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

C.. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN \ i February 14, 1939 A? Donorable Cao. 2. French County Attorney Deinderileld, Texee Dear Sir: This Oifice ia SO, 1939, arking for an opi her a delinquent tax oontraot madb on Deoember 6, Morris County and Edgar Eutohings, ie e valfd t provides for a 1s to termfnate under its $a=m8 on De her advise that the oontraot was E era1 and the Comptroller. You were then oeeded yourself on iranuary 1, 193 outed the waiver required. mdseionera, who olgned the 6, and the oounty also hae e d,oommissioners indloated their e the same was entered Into, has been no euoh indication or retifl- ofiioe, nor has the newly eleoted his approval. erioan Jurieprudenoe, 210, the following . . . The members of’ e board og county oommdssioners cannot, however, oontraot in referenoe to matters which are personal to their suooessors. Thus, R contract which a board.of oounty oommiaalonera attempts to employ a legal edviaer for a period of Hon. Ceo. B, Preneh, Pebruary14, 1.939,Page 2 three ye&e, to oomznence three months " in h he future and after the time for the eleotion of e person to fill the vaoanoy oeuaed by the exptration of the tew of orfice or one x&ber of the board, the tern or exploy- ment extending over a perioc curing which all the members of the board as oonstitutedet the time of the contwot will retire thererroz unless reeleoted, Is agelnst pubwe polioy . . .* Thb seema to be the law in Texas, which is expressed in 11 Tex. JUT., 651, es followa: 'Ordinarily,contracts3ade by e coxmIaalonersL court may not be repudiatedserely because the pereonnel or the body has.subsequentlychanged. It is only uh6re :theemploymeut by a oaamissionsrs~oourtis personal 8nd oonildential,aa in the ease of BP attornay, that It la held that one co~esloners* court has uo power. to bind its qluoot%mnwa This last quotedstiWuwnt’ig~ based on the only~.Texas aa6e on the -subject the oase'of gulf BitulithZo Co. v. BOueces Onpaty, 11 2. 8. (24) SC%%,whioh eays~: .."' *It 'la only where the employment. by a cozmia&on--’ era* uourt Is .pereonelan+,s.cnfidential, as ,ioX~.tLtb ease. 0r an dttornay, that It ia xs9Wtbat .one00nmlsrrion6am*~~ oourt eeunot bind its eue~es)a‘lY: The court deo&Mcns ix m@% of the other states that We heva found hold that one oouule8SoSex~*oourt oaanot bind ita suooea6or~ on personal contrset8,~.&ffey County v. Wth, SC 1Can. SW, 32 Pac. 30 (employmentoi oounty printer); Prsnklln Oouaty v. Ranok, 9 Ohio C. C. -301(lr.loyam& of courthouse Ulliken v. Edgar County, .&?!il. 828, 32 8.:%. 493 j","lont' of poorhouse auperintender,t]; Board of Commissionera1; Taylor, 123 Ind. 148, 23 N. g. e& (mploymmt or,attcirney); end billett v. Calhoun County, 217 P;Le.667, 117 So. 311 (employ%entof attorney). i:e believe +;?& the reasons w‘hich forbid 8 oommisaioncrs~ courtto enter into a contract for the employment of e man in a persoml end oonflde~,tia& oapaoity extending beyond the tern of office of the indlri.duelsaomposing such oomaiasionere*oourt epplfes with peculiar force to the employment of EttorneyS for the OOl- lection of deli!lqUCjnt taxes. lroca. do. 11.Fmoh, fsbnuryl4, 'lQS9,Page S t A tax oolleotor-attomoy*rouldneed taot, petlence an4 dlll.:Onoe, and e oansi8tslonors' Oourt a3uld lxwe every lncsntiveto warita aen tlth those qualltlds. 3~~31~ comda- doers nleht,am5 in aany lnstano~(~, would vlea the situation 13 aa entirelyalrrsr4& light rr0n the lnocmi~ ooz~68loner6. In skwt, oeoh oo8kai8610neravcourt 0haa be entit1ecto mnke Its own oontrectstouohbag on th6 aettor. ?W-tlsars~~re,th~roaaybea change ln the paraonaelo~ the00ulltp ntt0roef8 0rri04 :a dmh mfm the timy 4i60t4a oounty ntt?mey would have rl@ts wh%oh oamot be overlooked. Art;0107s32, Rs7ifmdantutea, prwia06 ror th4 00uey attorney to r6~rosent tne State sod oouaty ln malts ror dUnqtmt tax86 and pswitm r-8 ror suoh 6ervloo6. we 40 not b4um that an oiatgolneoomlaaloner8'oourt, ping oounty attom lawxxlsnt3 Ooun~~~~ soy 0r the rl tto~~pxysmt tka mu to oolbot the xmnpbr8~ao thorer0r. Furtho~~re, w3 bolhvo that ondsr 6uoh ohoui~6tabnoo8the ooontp n?xnal~at leeat haye the ohangeof havln$ a newscanty attora4y who w0til.Cattsad to ouoh matters r0r tha statutor)-ma pmviaeb ror hihada4 rhLah am gomrally a great coal les8 than the oaprroi68lonspaZU the C&O,, leotorcoetornoy.It 16 tma that in thlr lostan& tho~pswant oounty attorney 1s tb 8~ smnuh+ wa# ooaaty attorney at the th the COntntOt -8 B&i*, but t?lef-wi pti?~Oiph ia the -8 Fe do not bdl41vothat the autlon or the tvioiam W&O #re lattw to takeaKlos as wamla:crloneraIn lxdloatl'ng that they qqeo~ml tha oontraothas any beuiag on the cueatlon at hand. suah lnaioaticn on their pert wao aot qt orricfal eat and oould not bo euoh until t!mg hna qualiflsdttirtheir reapeotlveorflce8. iIbae%t any ratlfloatlon0P the4oontrnat.Lt la, t~iaretore, our oplnlont&t ?sa!!e lb not a bindInt: obligationupon nOrTi8 County. “fOUri VSV tNry