Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1985 )

, The Attornq General of Texas December 19. 1985 JIM MATTOX Attorney General Supreme Court Suildlng HonorableMike Driscoll Opinion No. .JM-396 P. 0. Box 12548 Austin, TX. 70711. 2548 Harris County Attorney 512l475.2501 1001 Preston, Suite 634 Re: Fees a district clerk -7 Telex 9101874.1367 Houston,Texas 77#D02 charge in a suit affectingthe Telecopier 512/4750268 pareat-childrelationship 714 Jackson. Suite 700 Dear Mr. Driscoll: Dallas, TX. 75202.4506 214l742-8944 At the requerrtof the district clerk of Harris County, you ask the following qumtions regarding fees to be collected in suits 4824 Alberta Ave.. Suhe 180 affectingthe pareac-childrelationship: El Paso, TX. 79905.2793 s15/533+%4 1. Is section 14.13 of the Family Code, as enacted by House Bill No. 1593 or as enacted by Senate Bill No. 1175, valid and effective,or are 1001 Texas. Suite 700 both valf'iand effective? Houston, TX. 77W2.3111 713/22%5SS6 2. Wh,ntfee may the district clerk charge for contempt actions for enforcementof child support 806 Broadway, Suite 312 orders antisuits to modify child support? Lubbock, TX. 79401.3479 SW747.5238 3. M&g the district clerk charge a managing consemattx (representedby the attorney general) 4309 N. Tenth. Suite S a $5 fee for orders withholdingfrom earnings for McAllen, TX. 78501.1885 child suplport? 512BS2.4547 Your first qmstion arises because the Sixty-ninthLegislature 2w Main Plaza, Suite 400 enacted two amendmentsto the Family Code and provided that each of San Antonio. TX. 78205.2797 them would be cod:l!liedas Family Code 514.13. Both provisionsdeal 512/2254191 with fees in suits affectingthe parent-childrelationship. The first of those provisionswas part of House Bill No. 1593: An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer Sec. 14.13. ADDITIONAL FILING FEE NOT REQUIRED. No additional filing fee may be collecte,ior required in a suit affecting the parent-c:xlld relationshipwhen a party to the suit files a motion to modify a decree under Section 14.08 of this code, or when a motion for the enforcemnt of an order is filed under Section 14.09 or 14.091 of this code. This section does not prohi'bitthe clerk from collectinga deposit in the amount set by the clerk as in other cases p. 1814 HonorableMike Driscoll- Page 2 (JM-396) for payment of enpected costs and other expenses arising in the proceeding. Acts 1985. 69th Leg., ch. 239, at 2039-40. Senate Bill No. 1175 containedthe other provisionto be labeledFamily Code section 14.13: Section 14.1:'.EXEMFTION FROM COURT FEES: ATTOENEY GENERAL. A clerk, auditor, sheriff, or other government officer or employee may not charge a fee or ather amount for servicesrendered in connection w:Xh an action or proceeding in which the attorney general of this state is representinga pctrtyfor the purpose of obtaining child support. Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961. Amendmentsenacted in t:hesame session of the legislatureare to be harmonized, if possible. V.T.C.S. art. 5429b-2, 53.05(b). Also, clericalmistakes by the l@slature should be disregarded. Attorney General OpinionsM-1207 (l!U2);C-106 (1963);V-1234 (1951). The two amendments at issue deal with different topics and do not conflict. The overlap in labeling is uothing more than a clerical error. Thus, both amendmentsare valid. The version of section 14.13 that is set out in House Bill No. 1593 provides the answer 1:o your second question. mat provision makes clear that the distr::ct clerk may not charge a fee for a motion to modify a decree or a mction for enforcementof an order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Apparently the district clerk'squestionarose becciu.seof uncertaintyabout the interpretation of the phrase "no additionXtfiling fee" in that provision. We think that the word "additional"<.aa referenceto the initiaa filing fee in the suit affecting the p.%:cent-child relationship. In effect, the provisionmeans that the cost of filing motions to modify or motions to enforce orders is cover&.by the initial filing fee. Your third question is whether a clerk can charge a managing conservatorwho is representedby the attorney general a $5 fee for orders that are mailed to employers requiringthem to withhold child support payments from an tmlployee'searnings. Generally,a district clerk may charge such a fee!: The employernay deduct from the ordered amount an administrativefee of not more than $5 per month to be cred:.ted towards the obliger'spayment of support. The clerk of the court may charge the requestor a-- rcztsonable fee for each order delivered to an %mployer by mail, not to exceed 2. (EmphasisacEled). p. 1815 HonorableMike Driscoll - I'age3 (JM-396) Family Code 514.43(i);Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1972. As we discussed previously, however, a clerk way not charge a fee for services rendered in connection with a proceeding in which the attorney general is repres(nitiug a party for the purpose of obtaining child support. Family Code 514.13; Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961. That exemption is applicable in the situation you describe. Therefore,you way uot chalge the $5 fee when the managing conservator is representedby the attorneygeneral. SUMMARY Section 14.13 of the Family Code, as enactedby House Bill No. 1593, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 239, at 2039-40, and section 14.13 of the Family Code, as enacted by Senate Bill No. 1175, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961, are both valid. The district cl,erkmay not charge a fee for motions to modiflra decree or motions for enforce- ment of orders iu suits affectingthe parent-child relationship. When a managing conservator Is representedby theeattorney general, the district clerk may not ch,arge the managing conservatora fee for orders mailed to employersrequiringthem to withhold c2.ild support payments from an employee'searniu8s. J-W Very truly yo , m JIM MATTOX AttorneyGeneral of Texas JACKHIGHTOWRR First AssistantAttorneyGmeral MARY KELLER ExecutiveAssistantAttorutyGeneral ROBRRT GRAY SpecialAssistantAttorney General RICK GILPIN Chairman,Opinion Comaitte~a Preparedby Sarah Woelk AssistantAttorneyGeneral p. 1816