DocketNumber: MW-490
Judges: Mark White
Filed Date: 7/2/1982
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017
The Attorney General of Texas July 8, 1982 MARKWHITE Attorney General Bonorable George N. Rodriguez Opinion No. MU-490 Suprmne Court Building El Paso county Attorney P. 0. Box 12549 Aurlin. TX. 78711.254S Room 201. City-County Building Re: Authority of county to 512l47525Dl El Peso, Texas 79901 purchase automobile liability Telex 9lW74.1387 Insurance on county patrol Telecopier 512/4759299 vehicles lW7 Hain St.. suite 14co Dear Nr. Rodriguez: Dallas. TX. 752914709 214l742-S944 You have requested an Attorney General’s Opinion regarding liability insurance for county owned vehicles. The facts are as 4524 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 follows: El Paso County has a population of less than 1,400,OOO. The El Paso. TX. 799052793 comissioners~court elected to provide transportation for its sheriffs 91Y533-3454 and deputies, as mandated by V.T.C.S.. article 6877-1. by furnishing “adequate motor transportation including all expenses Incidental to... upkeep and operation.” The commissioners court does not provide 1220 Dallas Ave.. Suite 292 Houston. TX. 771JOZ-S995 automobile liability insurance against claims brought under article z1- 6252-19, section 3, V.T.C.S. You have esked specifically: 806 Bradway. Suite 312 Lubbock. TX. 79491.2479 909/747-5239 Does the County Commissioners Court have the paver to provide for liability insurance on motor vehicles owned or leased by the county for use by 1309 N. Tenth. Suite B the sheriff and his deputies as patroi vehicles? McAlbn. TX. 79591.1685 and 512mS24547 Does the County Commissioners Court have the duty 2W Main Ptaza. Suite 4W to provide liability insurance on motor vehicles San Antonio, TX. 782D52797 owned or leased by the county for use by the 51212254191 sheriff and his deputies as patrol vehicles in a county with a population of less than 1,400,OOO An Equal Opportunity/ according to the most recent federal census? Affirmative Action Employer The Texas Tort Claims Act. article 6252-19. section 3 states: Each unit of government in the state shall be liable for money damages for personal injuries or death when proximately caused by the negligence or wrongful act or omission of any officer or employee acting within the scope of his employment p. 1741 Honorable George N. Rodriguez - Page 2 (k&490) or office erieing from the operation or use’ of a motor-driven vehicle.... Section 9 of the act further provides: [A]11 units of government are hereby expressly authorized to purchase policies of Insurance providing protection for such unite of government. their officers, agents and employees against claims brought under the provisions of this Act.... Counties are included in the definition of the phrase “unite of government” in section 2 (1). Thus, in the Texas Tort Claims Act.‘the legfslature gave express authority to counties to purchase Insurance to protect against liability for money damages for personal injury or death directly caused by the negligence or wrongful acts or omissions of any officer or employee acting within the scope of office arising from the operation or use of a motor vehicle (hereinafter “liability insurance”). The answer to your first ~queetion is that county commissioners courts do have the authority to purchase the liability insurance described above. In answer to your second question, it is our opinion that the cotmissioners court does not have a duty to provide liability insurance. Ue base this opinion on the fact that article 6701-h. section 33, V.T.C.S. (Safety Responsibility Law), exempts the United States; Texas,-, and politieel ~m~bdivisiuna dt79iLy state from the liability insurance required in article 6701-h. section IA(a). However, other leglelatlon requires liability insurance for the state and for certain political subdivisions. By the enactment of article 2372h-9. section 2(a), V.T.C.S., the legislature required liability insurance for sheriffs’ or constables’ motor vehicles in counties with e population of over 1.400.000. Likewise. article 999e. V.T.C.S., requires the state and every incorporated city and town to provide liability insurance for motor vehicles used by peace officers and fire fighters. The total effect of the three statutes is that the Safety Responsibility Law exempts the state and political subdivisions of the state from the requirement of liability insurance; however, by virtue of article 999e and article 2372h-9, section 2(a). the state, incorporated tovns and cities, and counties of over 1,400,OOO are required to have liability insurance. It has been argued that article 6877-1(a), V.T.C.S.. requires counties to purchase liability insurance. That article provides: The County Commissioners Courts of this State are directed to supply and pay for transportation of sheriffs of their respective counties and their p. 1742 / .” . ’ Honorable George N. Rodriguez - Page 3 (Mw-490) deputies to and from points within this Stete. under one of the four (4) following Sections: (a) Such sheriffs and their deputies shall be furnished adequate motor transportation including all expense incidental to the upkeep end operation of such motor vehicles. As stated earlier, the El Paso commissioners court has elected to “furnish adequate motor transporation including all expense Incidental to the upkeep and operation of such vehicles” as its method of compliance with the mandate to supply transportation to sheriffs. The question Is whether El Paso County has the duty to supply liability insurance on its vehicles as an expense incidental to their operation. It has been suggested that counties are Included in the exceptions given in article 999e, section l(a), reproduced below: The state and every incorporated city or town shall provide for insuring peace officers~and fire fighters in its employ against liability to third persons arising out of the operation, maintenance, or use of any motor vehicle owned or leased by the state, city or town. A county has only those powers and duties clearly set forth in the constitution or statutes. Mills County v. Lampasae County,40 S.W. 403
, 404 (Tex. 1897); Harrison County v. City of Marshali.253 S.W.2d 67
, 69 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort Worth 1952, writ ref’d). Counties are not mentioned in article 999e. No duty has been clearly set forth. In addition, if the word “state” included counties, there would be no need for the legislature to require liability insurance for counties of over 1,400.OOO. Therefore, article 999e. section l(a) does not impose a duty on counties. Section 9 of the Texas Tort Claims Act, vhich provides the authority for the purchase of liability insurance, is permissive only. There is no statutory or constitutional requirement for the purchase of liability insurance except those cited earlier. In the absence of an express duty, it is our opinion that counties with a population of less than 1.400.000 have the authority, but not the duty. to provide liability insurance. SUMMARY Counties with a population of less than 1.400.000 have the authority, but not the duty, to purchase Insurance policies to protect against liability for the negligence or wrongful acts or p. 1743 Honorable George N. Rodriguez - Pegs 4 OR+490) omissions of any officer or employee acting vithin the scope of employment *rising from the operation, use, or malntenaace of a motor vehicle owned by the county. w Attorney Ganerel of Texas -JOANW. FAINTER, JR. First Assistant Attorney General RICRARBE. GRAYIII Executive Assistent Attorney General Prepared by Pstricia Rinojosa Assistant Attorney General APPROVEB: OPINIONCOMMITTBE Susan L. Garrison, Chairman Rick Gilpin Patricia Binojoea .- Jim Ploellinger .' Edna Ramon Bruce Youngblood p. 1744