Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1944 )

OFFICE OF THE All-ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Eoaorable T. K. iirilkinson County Auditor; Ml1 County xillsboro~, Texas - Dear dlrr Pour letter of 944, requesting, the opinion of this depcirtrcent o eta ted reada, in part, aa ro~lowe: are on a Salary basis of the Peace me on a sreral mare the Conetables or salary eeoh month in ad- earn and retain. The Justloe t Ho. 1 is being allowed In earned and retained 811 eX-OfliOiO exceed $40.00 per rmnth, that ie am fees in the aixiunt Of $100~00 county pays the difterenoo 80 lone a8 d does not exoeed $40.00 per month - exainplee a8 foll0wa: “Ye08 for month - $30 .oo ~3ix-of’flolo paid by tha Cowty -Tpj- ‘hea far month . “LX-oSSiolo paid by oounty .~ 4i6 Honorable T. K. Wllklneon, P~~U5e8 *The Conoteblee are peld a oartain sun each month regardless of the amont of ices they earn and re- taln; %ow, questlone ass as r0uowst *1. Can the Cotrmleelonarr Court legally allow an lx -c ffloor lo salary to lupplmsmt isme earned and retalnod by a Juatlar oi the Poaoo in Hill Coontfl ‘8. Can the Comnieeionere Court legally allow an lr-otfiolo or MlaFy to eupplment raee rarnod and retained by a Constable in Kku COPnty? ‘5. Can the Oounty kudltor approve 8x- 0trioio or ealarler to luppleneot fees that are earned and retained bt Uouetablee aed Just1088 of the Pea00 in Hill county?” On several oooaefone this department ha8 hod under consideration questions ldentloal wfth the firetWo pU88tiOnS presented u your inquiry. In Conierenoe Opinion 100. glad, Blen- nial Heports or the attorney General of Texas, 1918-1920, pago 370, this dopartment hold, among other thlnge, that juetloea of the peaoe and aonetablee are aounty otfioiale within ths meaning ot mtlole 3893 (nor ,irtlolr 38951 and, as suoh, the Commieeionere* Courts may allow thare ex-offloio oompeneation when suoh officer8 render to the County 0x-0fri0i0 ewvloes. On November 9, lW6, Xonorablo Ii. Gsady Chandler, Assistant AttOrney General, rendered an opinion holding that justices or the peace say be paid 8x-off1010 oompansation. In Opinions No. O-185 end O-5470, this departmnt hold that tha Commieeionere~ Court of Peooe County end the Commle- elOnere* court of Midland County could by complying with the pro- ~ieione of krtlole 3895, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, allow ~+offlolo oompeneatlon to juetloee of the pea00 ior sx-ofilolo *erVloee rendered by them. We arm enoloelng ooples of ths ee two oPhion8 herewith. t Honorable T. II. iuilkineon, p-ge 3 in Op~ione No. o-138, 0410 and 043008, this de- part.rPsnt held that a CommieSlonere* Court IMJ, in it8 dleoretfon, allow a ex-ot?loIo oompeneatlon to oonetables who do not ro- oelre the maximum tees o? offloe allowed by law, provided that tb proviSions of Artlola 3095, Vernon18 Annotated Olrll Statutes, are oomplled with. In an8wer to your tlret two Queetlona, you are reepoottolly advised that it 18 the opinion ot this dqartnumt that the CoeueleelonerJ* Cast ot shill County oan legally allow lr-ot?iolo ooaponeatlon to juetiooe ot the peaoe and ooaJtriblee in said qiouaty where, Juoh prWinet oitlomre are oompeneated on a to0 baJiJ, provided luoh preolnot otrloiale do not reoalte the maxiplum tees o? ottioe as allowed br the applloablo rtatutr, and, turther provided that the prorieionr ot Artiolr s893, 8upra, are oonplled with. Whether the Ooaalerfonere~ Court SllGW8 0x-0rri0i0 oomp4asatlon to juetloer 0r the peaor and oanrtablee of Hill County, who an oonpeneated on a tee basis, lr solely within tb, dleoratlon of the OoimrlJelonere~Court. Stated another way, it fr our opinion that tha OoamlJeloners~ Court ot Hll.l~County1s legal17 authorired to allow lx-ottlolo oom- pensation to justice8 o? tha paaoe and aolutablre of said oounty who are oompeneated on a ire barie, who X'anderex-ottlolo maa8 $O:thbiCOU&~ rhon euoh Of?lOlalS do not reoelvo the maximum her OS ottl~ allowed by law. In eonneotlon,wlth thr foregoing statement, lt should br borne ld mind when tha 'CommlesloaerJ1 Court allcwr er-offiolo aompeaeatloa under Artlole 3893, eupra, euoh oOmpsn8at~on wbn odd4 tz the undisputed tees allowed and retained u&or Artlole 3883, oannot exoeed the marimum axpreased in Artiala 3891, Ver- aoa’e Annotated Civil Statutes, In view Of What h&8 heretofore been JJld in anJwer t0 your tlr8t tW0 QUeStlOn8, it n~OeSSt%rllp?ollowi that 7our third question awt be anewered ln the a?tirmatlva, and it l8 00 entered. rouse tort truly