Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1981 )

The Attorney General of Texas
May 30, 1981
MARK WHITE
Attorney General
Honorable Chris Victor Semoe, Chairman Opinion No. MW-349
Committee on Business & Industry
House of Representatives Re: Constitutionality of House
P. 0. Box 2910 Bill 995, 67th Legislature, Regular
Austin, Texas 78769 Session, concerning the use of
county law library funds
Dear Representative Semos:
House Bill 995, as introduced in the regular session of the 67th
Legislature, is styled ‘An Act relating to the authority to establish and
maintain law libraries in the district, county, and justice courts in each
county and the use of the county law library fund.” Your letter states:
I would like to request your opinion as to the
constitutionality of this bill. You issued your
opinion No. MW-9 dated March 1979 that the
“County Law Library Fund” was a trust fund and
could not be used to buy books for the judges.
The above bii seeks to do this in a different
manner. It has been brought to my attention
that this trust fund is a State of Texas trust
fund which is being administered by the
Commissioners Court and the original purpose
has to be followed.
Until 1977, there were a number of statutes dealing with law libraries.
Several of them applied only to counties of a certain population, but article
1702h, V.T.C.S., applied to all counties in the state. In 1977, all the statutes
other than article 1702h were repealed, and article 1702h was amended. Acts
1977, 65th Leg., R.S., ch. 131 at 271. It is article 1702h that House Bill 995
would again amend.
Three opinions of the attorney general have addressed article 1702h,
as amended in 1977. The first of them, Attorney General Opinion H-1062
(1977), concluded that the law library fund established by article 1702h was
earmarked for certain purposes by the statute and could not be used for
different purposes. The second, Attorney General Opinion H-1246 (1978),
determined that the statute was broad enough, when read with other laws, to
allow the establishment of branch libraries and the loan of library materials
to other libraries, so long as the dominant purpose of the statute was served.
Finally, Attorney General Opinion MW-9 (1979) stated that fees collected
pursuant to article 1702h could be used only “for county law library
purposes.”
p. 1154
Honorable Chris Victor Semos - Page Two (Mw-349)
In none of these opinions was it suggested that the legislature had no power to
divert the fund to other uses. All of them referred to statutory provisions, not
constitutional provisions, which restricted the use of such funds, and we are aware of
no constitutional provisions that would limit the power of the legislature to deal with
such funds in the manner which H.B. 995, as submitted to us, would deal with them.
See Gulf Insurance Co. v. James, 185 S.W.2d 966 (Tex. 1945). Where pursuant to
article 1702h. section 3. V.T.C.S.. the countv has heretofore acceoted eifts aurrmentina
the fund which gifts ‘were lawfully condi”tioned upon a particular use the&of, the
county may continue to devote the gift to those uses, but the legislature is not
constitutionally barred from opening the statutory fund to additional uses, or from
abolishing it altogether. cf. V.T.C.S. art. 4335 (officers entitled to laws).
SUMMARY
House Bill 995, 67th Legislature, Regular Session, if enacted,
would not unconstitutionally divert a special fund.
r MARK WHITE
Attorney General of Texas
JOHN W. FAINTER, JR.
First Assistant Attorney General
RICHARD E. GRAY III
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by Bruce Youngblood
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMlTTEE
Susan L. Garrison, Chairman
James Allison
Jon Bible
Rick Gilpin
Jim Moellinger
Bruce Youngblood
P. 1155