Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1995 )


Menu:
  •                            @ffice of toe JZlttornep@merat
    &dateof QCexae
    DAN MORALES
    ATTORNEY
    GENERAL                              February 21, 1995
    Honorable Mike Driscoll                          Opinion No. DM-324
    Harris County Attorney
    1001 Preston, Suite 634                          Re: Whether a justice of the peace may
    Houston, Texas 77002-1891                        contract with his or her employees to
    assume liabiity for shortages, and related
    questions (RQ-489)
    Dear Mr. Driscoll:
    You inform us that the Risk Management Department of Harris County has
    recommended that a particular justice of the peace adopt an office policy providing that
    employees who handle money will assume liability for any shortages. It is suggested that
    the judge’s employees sign an authorization consenting to the policy and that they be held
    accountable for shortages through some means such as payroll deductions. In connection
    with this proposal, you ask the following questions:
    May a justice of the peace contract with his or her employees to
    assume liability for shortages?
    If so, by what means can he enforce such agmement?
    Article XVI, section 61 of the Texas Constitution provides that “[all) fees earned
    by district, county and precinct officers shah be paid into the county treasury.” A public
    officer who collects public funds “is bound to account for and pay over the money he
    collects.” Coe v. Force, 50 SW. 616, 618 (Tex. Civ. App. 1899, writ refd) (holding
    county treasurer liable for county funds stolen through no fault of the treasurer’s). The
    duties of a public officer entrusted with public &utds “are prescribed . . by the law and by
    the terms of his bond.” Puole v. Bumet Cot&y, 76 SW. 425,427 (Tex. 1903). Pursuant
    to section 27.001 of the Government Code, a justice of the peace must give bond
    conditioned that he will “promptly pay to the entitled party all money that comes into the
    justice’s hands during the term of office.” Thus, a justice of the peace, like other public
    officers, is strictly liable for the money that is actually collected by him. Id at 427, Coe,
    50 SW. at 618; Attorney General Opinion TM-517 (1986); see Attorney General Qpiions
    JM-1055 (1989) (discussing statute that may reheve county tax assessor-collector of
    liability for loss of public funds); JM-398 (1985) (tinding county liable for reimbursiig
    county jail inmates for money stolen by escaping prisoner); H-360 (1974) (tinding district
    clerk liable for trust finds that “mysteriously disappeared” from clerk’s possession). Buf
    see Local Gov’t Code 8 157.903 (authorizing commissioners court to indemnify a county
    officer against personal liability for loss of county timds if loss did not resuh from officer’s
    negligence or criminal action).
    p.   1716
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 2          (DM-324)
    Section 112.052 of the Local Government Code makes the justice of the peace
    liable for tunds that he was required to collect:
    (a) A fine imposed or a judgment rendered by a justice of the
    peace shall be charged against that justice.
    (b) The justice may discharge the indebtedness by:
    (1) filing with the county clerk the county treasurer’s
    receipt for the amount of the indebtedness;
    (2) showing to the satisfaction of the commissioners court
    that the justice has used due diligence to collect the amount
    without avail; or
    (3) showing to the satisfaction of the commissioners court
    that the indebtedness has been satisfied by imprisonment or
    labor.
    Thus, the justice of the peace must pay to the county treasurer the money deriving Tom
    fines imposed and judgments rendered, unless he can discharge this indebtedness by
    making the showing required by subsection (b)(2) or (3) of section 112.052. The
    commissioners court may deduct an uncollected fee or commission from the justice of the
    peace’s salary if it finds that he has failed through neglect to collect a fee or commission
    that he is required by law to collect. Local Gov’t Code $ 154.009; see Eguia v.
    Tompkins, 
    756 F.2d 1130
    (5th Cir. 1985) (upholding collection of fees from justice of the
    peace under section 154.009 of Local Government Code); Hurrii County v.
    Schoen~ucher, 
    594 S.W.2d 106
    (Tex. Civ. App.-Houston [lst Dist.] 1979, writ refd
    n.r.e.) (holding that chief juvenile probation offmer was employee and therefore was not
    liable under predecessor of Local Government Code section 154.009 for failure to pay
    fees into county treasury).
    The justice of the peace may not free himself from his common law and statutory
    liability for collecting funds and paying them to the county treasurer by attempting to
    delegate such liability to his employees. See Newsom v. Adams, 451 S.W.Zd 948 (Tex.
    Civ. App.--Beaumont 1970, no writ); Moody v. Texas Wafer Comm’n, 373 S.W.Zd 793
    (Tex. Civ. App.--Austin 1963, writ ref d n.r.e.); Wagner v. Urban, 
    170 S.W.2d 270
    (Tex.
    Civ. App.--Amarillo 1943, no writ); Attorney General Opinion H-386 (1974). Nor may
    he contract with his employees to transfer his liability to them. Attorney General Opinion
    Jh4-856 (1988) (stating that sheriff was responsible for shortage in timds attributable to a
    deputy).
    Although the justice of the peace remains strictly liable to the county treasury for
    the money he collects, his employees are liable to him under common law for damages
    they cause him by their own negligence. See Yarborough v. Fulron, 
    78 S.W.2d 247
    (Tex.
    Civ. App.--El Paso 1935, writ dism’d); Commercial Stare Bunk v. Van Hu?fon, 208 S.W.
    p. 1717
    Honorable Mike Drlscoll - Page 3         (DM-324)
    363 (Tex. Civ. App.--San Antonio 1919, no writ). If the justice of the peace must
    reimburse the county for shortages of public timds caused by an employee’s negligence or
    misconduct, he may seek damages from the employee. In our opinion, the justice of the
    peace may require employees to provide, as a condition of employment, a written
    acknowledgment and acceptance of liability for shortages in collections that are caused by
    the employee’s negligence or misconduct. See Gov’t Code 4 27.056 (authorizing justice
    of peace to designate one or more persons to serve as clerk); Local Gov’t Code 5 15 1.901
    (authorizing commissioners court to enter order. to employ secretarial personnel for
    precinct officer), see also Attorney General Opinions IM-521 (1986) (holding that
    commissioners court has authority to set conditions of work for persons it employs but not
    for employees of other elected county officers); M-l 197 (1972) (commissioners court
    does not have authority to set office hours for employees ofjustice of the peace).
    You also ask how the justice of the peace may enforce this agreement against an
    employee who is responsible for a shortage. In particular, you inquire whether the justice
    of the peace may withhold the employee’s paycheck, or deduct the money from his
    paycheck.
    Since an employee would be liable for his shortages to the justice of the peace
    individually, and not to the county, there would be no basis for invoking section 154.025
    of the Local Government Code, which prohibits drawing a warrant on a salary fimd in
    favor of a person “who is indebted to the state, the county, or the salary fund.” See
    Orange Comfy v. Ware, 
    819 S.W.2d 472
    (Tex. 1991) (withholding of county
    commissioner’s salary for debts created by bail bond forfeiture judgments did not
    constitute garnishment of current wages); Attorney General Opinion WW-1504 (1962)
    (holding that predecessor of Local Government Code section 154.025 did not permit
    withholding of deputy sheriffs salary based on charges that deputy misappropriated timds
    and on deputy’s partial restitution, in absence of judicial decision). See also Attorney
    General Opinions JM-255 (1984); MW-416 (1981); Letter Advisory No. 57 (1973)
    (construing former article 4350, V.T.C.S., now section 403.055 of Government Code,
    prohibiting issuance of warrant to person indebted to state).
    This office has held that the county could not authorize payroll deductions from a
    county employee’s salary without express statutory authority. Attorney General Opinion
    JM-38 (1983). \Chapter 155 of the Local Government Code, which authorizes deductions
    from county employees’ compensation for various specific purposes, does not include a
    provision authorizing payroll deductions for debts owed by county employees. See
    generally Educ. Code 8 2.07 (authorizing voluntary salary deductions from salaries of
    teachers and school employees as security for indebtedness); Attorney General Opinion
    JM-53 (1983) (construing section 2.07 of Education Code). Accordingly, there is no
    authority for the justice of the peace to enforce payment of an employee’s debt to him
    through a deduction from the employee’s salary.
    p. 1718
    Honorable Mike Driscoll - Page 4          (DM-324)
    SUMMARY
    A justice of the peace is strictly liable for paying to the county
    treasury fees and other funds actually collected by him, subject to
    statutory remedies. A justice of the peace may not free himself of his
    liability for collecting timds and paying them to the county treasury
    by attempting to transfer this liability to his employees, by agreement
    or delegation. However, if a justice of tbe.peace must reimburse the
    county for shortages of public funds caused by an employee’s
    negligence or misconduct, the employee is liable to the justice of the
    peace for the loss. The justice of the peace may rcyuire the
    employee to provide, as a condition of employment, a written
    acknowledgment and acceptance of liability for shortages in
    collections that are caused by the employee’s own negligence or
    misconduct. Section 154.025 of the Local Government Code does
    not authorize enforcement of this agreement by withholding the
    employee’s salary warrant, nor do we find any provision for
    enforcing it by payroll deduction.
    DAN     MORALES
    Attorney General of Texas
    JORGE VEGA
    First Assistant Attorney General
    SARAH J. SHIRLEY
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    Prepared by Susan L. Garrison
    Assistant Attorney General
    p. 1719
    

Document Info

Docket Number: DM-324

Judges: Dan Morales

Filed Date: 7/2/1995

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017