Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1951 )

~&m&e resulted to the-&n%tm an6&‘+--- perlee, .* ~ecficide s&s &xed with 6f.ess.i. fuel for apray%ng and f.n11~3ny~trpelcta was dif’f’erent Dom the insecticide u8ed in spray- 5-r@ the interiors of houses. The’owne~a of the house are pmssing a claim &gain& the county. fo m. rda lueg ln e s Ttii’Xau ta tie11 settled that a.county is ‘8 govern&h1 agency and, as. mob, iai not lianle. for the n.gg&ymt act8 of fXa ~agelits or em‘ployeix unless.liaol.lltv th&efo~ has.beeti sneclficcill~ OF impliedif &vlded by statute; ~l&iseaiGd if; geeeC~3;ls?8 S.W.2d 475 (Tex. Clv. APP. NWj!r w Colorado Rlves’Authorfty, 153’S 24. 55 Tet:Civ. App. 19~2j;.At$‘.y.@zp. Qp..V-o? ‘~%Xpcd there is’no stat&i making a. county lf.ab3.B i?x! the tortiQu8 acts af its age&a,. it 18 our-.oplnlon’that Jlm~well8 GoQnty Is not llablR!‘f,or.~he.wrongful .act 0f:aa employee’ in spraying th& Inaixticide. . ~eim&ntai agency,. ZerfdLi’the wMmful act. APPROVF& Yomd very truly; _- ._