Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1984 )

The Attorney General of Texas
JIM MAllOX December 13, 1984
Attorney General
Supremr Court BulldIn Honorable Tim Curry Opinion No. JM-249
P. 0. Box 12548 Criminal District Attorney
Austin. TX. 7S711.254s Tarrant County Courthouse Re: Whether a commissioners court
512/4752501 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 or a board of district judges may
Telex 9101874.13(17
limit the services of a county
Telecopier 512147502SS
domestic relations office
persons having a particular income
714 Jackson. Sulle 700
Dflhf. TX. 75202-450(1 Dear Hr. Curry:
214l742-8944
You ask us the, following two questions:
4S24 A,be,ta Ave.. Sulb 180
El Paso, TX. 799052793 1. Dc~es the Tarrant County Commissioners Court
91YS3534S4 or the board of district judges of Tarrant County
have the authority under article 5142a-1,
1001 Texas, Suit9 700 V.T.C.S. I to limit the services of the Tarrant
Hourton. TX. 77002.3111 County Domestic Relations Office to those citizens
71Y223.5880 having am Income which does not exceed a dollar
figure to be determined by the commissioners
court?
800Brosdwsy, SuIL312
Lubbock. TX. 79401-3479
8081747.5239 2. III the alternative, may a graduated
applicat:lon fee be implemented which would be
based on the income of those persons seeking to
4309 N. Tenth. Suib B
McAllen. TX. 78501.199S
utilize the services of the Domestic Relations
512lSS2.4547 Office, as is the practice of the Tarrant County
Eospital District?
200 Msin Plaza. SUlb 400 We answer both of your questions in the negative.
San Antonlo, TX. 782052797
51212254191
Article 5142a,-1. V.T.C.S.. provides for the establishment by
commissioners court of a Domestic Relations Office administered either
An Equal Opponunltyl by the juvenile beard of a county or multicounty area or otherwise
Alflrmatlva Actlon Employer provided by the ~:ommissloners court. V.T.C.S. art. 5142``1, Ill,
2(a). The statute further provides for the continued operation of
already existing domestic relations offices. Sections 3 and 4 of
act set forth t!vs duties imposed upon, and additional services
provided by. such domestic relations offices. Section 5 permits
certain courts to order that court ordered payment for child support
be made to the doalclstic relations office. Section 6 governs the fees
and costs which clay be charged. Section 6 of article 5142a-1,
V.T.C.S., provides the following:
Ronorable Tim Curry - Page 2 (JM-249)
Sec. 6. (a) If a domestic relations office is
in existence prior to or is established pursuant
to this article, the comissioners court may
authorize one or more of the following:
(1) A fee not to exceed $5 on the filing in
the county of each suit for the dissolution of a
marriage and each suit affecting the parent-child
relationship. Su:h fee shall be paid as other
costs in the suit and collected by the clerk of
the court.
(2) The assescmlent of attorney fees and court
costs incurred by the domestic relations office in
enforcing an order, for child support or visitation
against the party !iound. to be in violation of the
order.
(3) An application fee to be charged to
persons seeking services from the domestic
relations office.
(4) A monthly charge of up to $1 per month to
be paid by each managing and possessory
conseNator for wlwm services are provided by the
domestic relationri office.
(b) Fees authD.rlred under this article shall
be sent to the county treasurer or other officer
performing the duties of the county treasurer for
deposit In a spec:i.al fund entitled the ‘domestic
relations office fund.’ This fund shall be
administered by th:e domestic relations office and
shall be used to provide services by the domestic
relations office as provided In this article.
County general funds may also be used to provide
these services.
We must~interpret a stiitute in a way which expresses
only the will of l:be makers of the law, not forced
nor strained, but simply such as the words of the
law in their plain sense fairly sanction and will
clearly sustain.
Railroad Commission of Texas v. Miller, 434 S.W.2d 670, 672 (Tex.
1968) (quoting Texas High*; y Ccmueission v. El Paso Bldg. h Const.
Trades Council, 234 S.W.Zd ;Fi7 (Tex. 1950)). Indeed in this instance,
the statute itself is not ambiguous. See Col-Tex. Refining Co. v.
Railroad Commission of Texas, 240 S.W.Zn47, 750 (Tex. 1951). No
authority is conferred upor;a commissioners court to limit the class
p. 1114 I
Honorable Tim Curry - Page 3 (JM-249)
of persons receiving services from a domestic relations office to
persons whose income does not exceed a dollar figure to be determined
by the comlssloners court.
Nor do we accept the argument that a commissioners court
possesses the inherent powar to limit in such fashion the class of
persons who may avsil themselves of the services offered by a domestic
relations office. A countv has onlv those nowers which are conferred
either expressly or by nelessary implication by the constitution and
statutes of this state. Canales v. Laughlin, 214 S.W.Zd 451, 453
(Tex. 1948). Such autho& has neither expressly nor by necessary
Implication been conferred upon commissioners-courts. Accordingly, we
answer your question in the negative.
In your second question. you ask whether the commissioners court
may adopt a graduated application fee schedule based upon the income
of those persons seeking the services. You refer us to such a scheme
permitted county hospital c.istricts by section 14 of article 4494n,
V.T.C.S. For the same r’zasons discussed in answer to your first
question, we answer your second question in the negative. The statute
simply does not authorize the implementation of such a graduated fee
schedule, and the conferring of such authority cannot be necessarily
implied from those powers which are explicitly conferred.
SUMMARY
1. A commiss:loners court is not authorized by
article 5142a-1, V.T.C.S.. to limit the class of
persons who rece::vc services offered by a Domestic
Relations Office ‘to persons whose income does not
exceed a doll P:C figure determined by the
commissioners court.
2. A cormnfss:Loners court is not authorized by
article 5142a-1. V.T.C.S., to adopt a graduated
fee schedule based on the income of persons
seeking to utilize the services of a Domestic
Relations Office,
JIM MATTOX -
Attorney General of Texas
TOMGREEN
First Assistant Attorney Gcmtleral
p. 1115
Honorable Tim Curry - Page 4 (JM-249)
DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorne:r General
RYCKGILPIN
Chairman. Opinion Committee
Prepared by Jim Moellinger
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Rick Gilph, Chairman
Colin Carl
Susan Garrison
Tony Guillory
Jim Moellinger
Jennifer Riggs
Nancy Sutton
Bruce Youngblood
p. 11'16