Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1959 )


Menu:
  •                     0       EXAS
    April 27, 1959
    Honorable R. H. Gory, Chairman
    State Affairs Committee
    House of Representatives
    Austin, Texas
    Qpinion NO. ``-605
    Re:   Applioability of sta-
    tutes of limitation
    to the causesof action
    involved in House Con-
    current Resolution 55
    of the 56th Legislatures,
    Dear Mr. Gory:                         and related questions.
    In your recent letter you have asked with regard
    to House Concurrent Resolutron 55:
    II. . . whether or not, if this resolu-
    _ .             ^ _. .   .
    tlon was passed, tne statute or llmlta~tlons
    would have run againat the cause.of action
    contained therein, and whether orpnot the
    statement concerning no admission of liabfllty
    is sufficient In the form set.forth in the
    bill."
    The statutes of limitation do not begin to run
    in favor of the State until legislative permission to 8ue
    has been granted..'State v. Elliott, 212.S.Y. 695 (Civ.App.
    1919, error ref.); Walker:v. State, 
    103 S.W.2d 404
    (Civ.
    App. 1937); National BiscuZt C   v. State> 
    129 S.W.2d 494
    (Oiv.App..1937' reversed o~'other groUnd8, 134 Tax.
    293, 
    135 S.W. 26
    687); BarRanIer v.
    901 (Civ.Aue. 1952; reh.denJ; 28 Tex.Jur.*
    Guest,g,$6SfEW.2;
    ,
    Accordingly; yoir,?ir8t question 18 answered in the nega-
    tive.
    The portion of the bill stating that "No admis-
    sion of liability of the State is made by the passage of
    this Resolutlonw~Is, when viewed by itself, sufficient
    to avoid any admission of li~abllity. It should be'noted,
    however, that the bfll contain8 a declaration in partial
    conflict with the aforesaid provlelon to the extent that
    Honorable R. H. Gory, Chairman, page 2 (WW-605)
    the declaration attempis to admit certain elements of
    liability by stating, . . . Dr. Spies was unwarrantedly
    relieved of his duties and dismissed by summary, peremptory
    and unilateral action of the Board of Regents . . .".
    But, a concurrent resolution of the Legislature
    attempting to create liability on the part of the State is
    void, as this can be accomplished only by a general act of
    the Legislature. State V. Isbell, 
    127 Tex. 399
    , 
    94 S.W. 2d
    423 (1936). The portion of House Concurrent Resolution
    55 which either Intentionally or inadvertently attempts to
    admit certain elements.of liability would, therefore, be
    ineffectlve. Accordingly, your second question is answered
    in the affirmative.
    The cause of action referred to in House
    Concurrent Resolution 55 is not barred by
    the statutes of limitation because they do
    not begin running until legislative consent
    Is given, and the Resolution does not admit
    liability on the part of the State because
    a concurrent resolution cannot admit liability.
    Very truly yours,
    WILL WILSON
    Attorney General of Texas
    BY7           G4
    enry G. Braswell
    Sk-+           @@+-Q-4
    Assistant
    HGB:mg
    AP,PROVED:
    OPINION COMMITTEE
    Geo. P. Blackburn; Chairman
    C. Dean Davis
    Riley Eugene Fletcher
    Paul W. Floyd, Jr.
    REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
    By: W. V. Geppert
    

Document Info

Docket Number: WW-605

Judges: Will Wilson

Filed Date: 7/2/1959

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017