Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1952 )


Menu:
  •                  April 29, 1952
    Hon. Fred C. Brigman, Jr. Opinion 6   V-1437.
    County Attorney
    uvalde county             Re: Eligibility of a person
    palde, Texas                   who will have resided
    In a commissioners8pre-
    cinct for four months
    on the date of the first
    primary t,obe a csndi-
    date for county commis-
    Dear Sir:                      sioner.
    .Youhave requested an opinion of this office
    on the following question involving an interpretation
    of Section 5 of the Texas Election Code (Acts 52na Leg., 'l.'?
    B.S. 1951, ch.'~~&92,
    p. 1097):
    "1s a person who will have resided in          '
    a'commlssioners'precinct for four months
    at the date of the first primary election
    but who will have resided in that precinct
    for seven months at the time of the general
    election eligible to have his name placed
    on the primary election ballot for the of-
    fice of county commissioner?~~
    Section 5 of the Election Code reads as fol-
    lows:
    90 person shall be eligible to any
    State, county, precinct or municipal office
    in ,thisState unless he shall be eligible
    to hold office under the Constitutionof
    this State, and unless he shall have resided
    in this State for the period of twelve (12)
    months and six (6) months in the county, pre-
    cinct, or municipality,in which he offers
    himself as a candidate,next preceding any
    general or special election and shall have
    been an actual.bonafide ciiiaen of said
    county, precinct, or munici ality for six
    (6) months. NO person inelEgible to hold
    office shall ever have his name placed upon
    r : ‘,?
    ti! .*n   Hon. Fred Cl Brigman, Jr., page 2   (v-1437)
    the ballot at any general or special
    election, or at any primary election
    where candidatesare selectedunder
    primary election laws of this State;
    and no such ineligiblecandidate shall
    ever be voted upon, nor have votes
    counted for him at any such general,
    special, or primary election. . o o"
    This section is taken from Article 2927 V.C.S., and is
    in Identical language except that Article 2927 required
    the candidate to have been acitizen of the county, pre-
    cinct, or municipalityfor "more than sizmonths,~~where-
    as the present statute reads "for six months."
    The question ou have presentedwas answered
    in Att'y Gen. Op, o-196?T(l%O), which held that the six
    months' residence and citizenshiprequirementsin Arti-
    cle 2927 were referable to the general or special elec-
    tion at which the officer was to be elected, and did not
    refer to primary elections for the nomination of party
    candidates. In the course of the opinion it was stated:
    "It is observed that the term 'gen-
    era1 or special election,~~only,appears
    in the first sentence of the statute;
    whereas, thereafter in the statute touch-
    ing a different but related matter appear
    the terms 'any general or special elec-
    tion, or at any primary election.' Clearly,
    therefore, the employment of the term 'gen-
    eral or special election,:pertaining to
    the six months residence and citizenship
    requirementwas not intended to include
    primary electlons. . . .
    "It has been repeatedlyheld by this
    department that, under Article 
    2927, supra
    ,
    apart from other necessary qualifications,
    an individual is eligible to hold a public
    office if he has resided in, and been a
    bona fide citizen of, the county, precinct,
    or municipality six months prior to the
    general election or special elections fixed
    by law.n,
    The Legislature .in re-enactingSection 5 of
    the Election Code in sub~s{antially
    the same language
    Hon. Fred C. Brigman, Jr., page 3   (v-1437)
    used in Article 2927, is presumed to have had knowl-
    edge of the constructionwhich had been placed on
    the former statute and to have intended the same
    meaning in the re-enactment. tenhens Countv
    .pfnyd ;lg,Te;. 397, 16 S.W.2pd804 (1929);Fez&al
    rud I           Yount-Lee Oil Co., 
    122 Tex. 21
    , 52
    S.w.2d 56'(1532;; :~Railroadc mmission of.Tex    .
    Texas &,R. 0. R Co.',42 s.W.% 1091 (Tex.'CitsIpp.
    1931, error ref:).
    You have called our attention to Rosette v.
    m,      
    196 S.W.2d 658
    (Tex. Civ. App, 1946) wherein
    the contentionwas made that a nominee for ihe office
    of county commissionerwas an ineligible candidate
    because he~had not resided in the precinct for six
    months on the date of the primary election at which
    he was nominated. 'Apparentlythe contestantwas con-
    tending that the successful candidatehad not been
    at any timera "bona fide citizenn or resident of the
    @ecinct.'~ In affirming the judgment of the trial
    .court,the,Court of Civil Appeals held that the trial
    court's finding thatthe nominee was a re,sidentof
    the precinctwas binding upon the appellate court,
    since the evidence was such that reasonableminds         .:
    5
    might draw different inferences and conclusionsthere-
    from. The court did not state what the length of the
    nomineet-sresidence in the precinct had been, nor did
    s,     it say that he must have been a resident for six
    i;    months  preceding the primary in order to be an eligi-
    ;2,,i
    . ble candidate. We do not interpret this opinion as
    expressinga view favorable to the contestant1.s con-
    tention that the statute required residence in the
    precinct for six months preceding the~primarY election.
    p,
    Kamas~v. Stenaq 
    197 S.W.2d 193
    (Tex. Civ.
    ?&    App. 1946), involved a fait situation similar to that
    -in Rosette v. Rqm&. Here also, the~contentionwas
    made that the candidatewas Ineligiblebecause he had
    not resided in the precinct for six months next preced-
    ing the date of the primary. The issue in dispute was
    whether the candidatewas a resident of the precinct
    during the time he had been temporarilyabsent while
    engaged in war work. The court's holding was that the
    candidateby engaging in emergency temporarywar work
    in another county did not abandon his residencewhich
    ~haa been definitelyfixed in the precinct for a number
    of years before he entered upon that employment. It
    is evident from the opinion that the court was not con-
    cerned with the exact point of time from which the
    Hon. Fred C. Brigman, Jr., page 4   W-1437)
    prior.six months' residence shoula'becomputed and
    was not passing on that question.
    We have been unable to find any other case
    touching upon the precise question here InVOlVed.
    Since it is our opinion that neither of the two case
    discussed above has ruled upon this point, we adhere
    fi to the former holding'of this office in Opinion O-
    (,+; 1964, m.
    A candidatefor the office qf county
    commissionerwho will have resided.ln the
    commissibners'precinct for six months at
    the time of the general election fulfills
    the six months' residence requirementof
    Section 5, Election.Code,and residence in
    the precinct for less than six months at
    the time of the primary election does not
    make him ineligibls.tohave his name placed
    on t~heprimary ballot.
    APPROVED:,                      Yours very truly,
    J. C. Davis, Jr.
    County Affairs Division
    EL Jacobson
    Reviewing Assistant
    Charles D. Mathews
    First Assistant
    MKW:wb
    

Document Info

Docket Number: V-1437

Judges: Price Daniel

Filed Date: 7/2/1952

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017