Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1944 )

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Honorable H. D. Garrett County Attorney Rains county Iiaory,~ Texes Dem se: ..~, ed 14 your latter OS rabla f3ar8ia0. Yann, upon rhioh you his &spartment. ndent) arslatant superih- genoy and haa soma aohool e poliotas having been M abslatant euporlntend- expire prior to 1945, loited aohool lnsukanoe Siioe, nor doce ho propose to solloit hilain offlae. A queetion has been ether he may Pagally serve as asslst- IMendent and om the agenoy, having in ioroe, oovering sohool builUlngs, to his induotlon into 0frh.w ‘6eessume the assietant superintendent referred to was employ& by virtue of the authority vested in the County Superintep&ent unbar Artiole 2700 Revised Civil Statutes, 1926. 669 Honorable Ii.D. Garrett, pace 2 Such an assistant oontemplated under this statute was held to be one whose duties are to be performed lo oonneotion with, end under the direotion of the superintendent. Neeper vs. Stewart, 66 S. X. (2d) 812. The faot that an assistaut owns an insursnoe egenoy through whloh the Insurance on aohool property is written prior to his employment by the County Superintendent, suoh would note :~ eonetltute the employrent illegal nor prohibit the owner of the agency from legally performing the Unties or his employment as aesletant County Superintendent. Under your iaots aubmitteb, it 1s therefore the opinion of this department that your question be and It 16 answered in. the aiflnnatlre.