Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

R-410
PRICE DANIEL
ATTORNEYOF.NERAl. June 28, 1947
Honorsblo W. E. Berron ojanion NO. v-269
District Attorney
12th Judicial Dlstrlct Re: Qusllfloetlonsof
Orlmea county Veterans' County
Rsvesote, Texsa Service Officer
Deer Slrr ,
Pour request for en oplalon 1s in part es
follows: ~.
"I would like en opinion from ,your
Department on the following questions:
.’ "1. I8 a peraoliqualified for'ep-
polntment to ,theOffice of Veterans
County Servloe Offloer if'he has not had .~
88 much as sixty days aervloe'in the A.rm-
ed Forces? . _. : "
"2; Shbuid you~hold'that such person
la not qualified to fill the.,offlceand
the length of his service Is known to the
CommissionersCourt, would the psyment msde
to him by the Court b$ en illegal expendl-
tu$ of County funds?
Section 2 of Article
: 5798e-2 reeds:
"Such Vetewns County Service Officer
end/or AssistantVeterans County Servioe Of-
ficer shall.,If so appointed, serve for the
reiaslndeti
of%he ourrent county Plscel yeer
during which they era appointed end there-
after shall be'appolnted for and serve for a
term Of two years, unleae sooner removed for
aause by the appointing authority. Suoh Vet-
erans County Servlc’eOffloer end such Asslst-
ant Veterans County Service OffYcer shall be
qualified by education end trsinlng for the
duties of euah offioe. They shell be exper- ~..~
lenced la the law, regulationsend rulings'
-ofthe'unlted States Vetersns Adminlstrstlon
Honorable W. E. Berron - Page 2
aontrolllngcases before them;and shell
themselveshave served In the active &I-
tery, nav.91or other armed forces or nurses
corps of the United States during the Span-
tsh AmericanWar;World War I,.or World Er
n, for e period of et least.four months,
end have been honorablydischarged f'romsuoh
service. Such persoti hall ha had et
least two veer18 experizncees eVeSemilce if-
fleer In a-natlonaliyrecognizedveterans
organizationengaged In service: work to vet-
erans, as defined by the United..StatesVet-
erans Admlnlstratlon,either as a Post,~
State, Department,or ~etlona1Servlce Of-'
fleer, which shall be'evldencedby-a stete-
ment of qualificationsfiled by the lndivld-
us1 seeking appointment,with the County Com-
~mlsslonersCourt, upon forms supplied by the
Veterens'StateService Officer of the State
of T8xa8, which shall be aertlfled to by the
Ste,teCommander of the veterans organization '.
to'which such epplloent shall belong, or shall
have had one gear?, experienceas a County
Sewice Officer 06 AssistantCounty.ServQe Of-
ficer, or shall have been.glv&ne certl..flcattiI
by the VBtersns State Sekvlce Officer, who ia
hereby authorizedto prescribe the~tralnlng
and qualificationsrequired for.the Issuance &'
such certificate. A statement showing tbat ep
pllcent possesses one or more of the above
qualific.atlous,eccompsnledby supportingcer-
tificate, shall be filed with the County Com-
mlstiloners,
Court et, or before the'tlme said
&ppolntments.ere.made, an&the filing thereof
shall be e condition precedent to ~suchappolnt-
me&." ~(Bllphas1a;0urs).;
This Offloe In Opinion No. O-6489 oonstrued
this Artlole to mean that regardless of the other qual-
lfioatSona,enapplicant for the office of Veterans'
County Servloe Officer m8y possess~,If he has not serv-,
ed In the active mllltary~nevel or atied forces during
the Spanish-AmericanWar, World War I or World War II
for a period of et least fbur months, he would not be
eligible for the position of Veterans' County Service
Offioer or AssistantVeterans.'County Service Offlder.
We are enclosinge copy of this oplnlon. This.answers
your .flrstquestion In the negative.
Eonoreble ,W. E. Be1 .. 0’3
34 Texas Jurisprudence618, Sec. 164 reeds
In pert ei follows:
“4 person msy be a de faoto,offlcer
though he Is lnellglbleto the offioe In
which he funotlons. , .‘I
The case of Bell vs. Feilkner, 19 3.w. 480,
‘by the Supreme Court of Texss, held that a clerk of en
election who was e minor, under 21 years of age, end
liotentitled to vote was nonethelesse de facto offioer
lend his lnellglbilltyto hold the office would not ren-
der the election void.
In Germsriyvs. State, 3 S.W. (2) 798, the
Court of Criminal Appeals, speaking through Judge
Christian, said: : .~
?A person msy be’a.de faato’offlcer’.
~though,lnellglble to such offloet’Brosch
‘v. Gerth et al.,(Tex; Clvi App’.)50 3.W; ‘-
594.;Grsves v. M. Griffin-OVell~& Sbus
(Tex. Clv.~App.),l89~S.W.-T.78.Y
.,
Next, let-us oorislderthendefinition.of 8 de ~
fao~o‘offloer..M&hem ‘ou.Publlc O’fflc@ii
and Officers
et Page ?12,,Seotldti317 ti&eds;&jsfol~lowsr’ ,``.
:’
~C, ..:g
. ; &d’Ell&nbotiou&i deflked.an:.
‘. .offlaerde.fa’otbt.o.b’e
lone tiho~heethe ;
reputetlod of beShg the offleer he eas’mes
to be end pet,ls not a gobd,qffloer in point.
of’Uwf@ end this’definltlonhas,,Ln,sub-
.”sttinoe,beea adopt&d by the:majorltyof the
dwes, aad the neaessity for 8’coloF of eleo-
,,ltlonbee ndt been efflrmed,‘sofar 8s the :
rights o< third ‘personseti .coperned.”
’ Tjaroop&i PubllO Offioerrj,definea e he feeto
~ogrldiyson’pge59,. qeotlqn,,622of his work es follcwar
“In gen&l,~l$ &y:be said,.that tihere 4 ‘,
the question e?lses, a.8to the’velidltyof
t&s exercise~ofa pertlouler power the off16
oer de Jur? ia one wh,o,at the time of swh
exercise ,md the right’t6 the oiflce, but ”
wea kept out of possessiqn.thereof,and who.
has since establishedhis right; while the
offioerde feoto is the one,.who exeralsed
.
Honorable W. E. Barron - Page 4
the power, being then in possession of ,~
the offioe under color authority, but
without eatual right thereto. And the
general rule IS, that the exercise of
8 power by the offloer de facto, which
lewfully pertained to the office of
which he had possession,Is valid end
binding, where ltls for the intereat i
of the publlo, or of any Individual,
other than the officer himself, to sus-
tain the officer'sact; but where the
officer hlmself'foundsa right upon suoh
exeralse, either personally or offlalelly,
it Is not valid in,his favor." ,,
From the'foregolngauthoritiesend deflnl-
tlons %he Veterans Service Officer In the Instant oese
Is unquestionablye de facto officer. The next ques-
tion for our considerationIs whether payments msde to
~I~,111 constitutean Illegal expenditureof oounty~
.
The general rule iaid down In i3,A.L.R. 266
';is8s follqws: ,
"There Is considerableauthority to
the effectthat e de fecto,offloerwho,
pursuant to epparent authority end in good
faith;has performed the duties pertaining
to the office',may, In the absence of e de
jure claimant, enforce payment by %he pub-
lie of the oompensetlonto,which en incum-
bent of the offioe Is entitled for servloep
performed or~dutlesfulfilled."
This Bnnotatlqn In 4.L.R. altes two !Pezes
asses edherlng to this rule end,dlsoua~eesthem on psge
,.268 in the following language:
: "In Rowton v. 4lbers (1903) 32 Tex. .,
,Olv. App. 70, 73 S.W. 1084, It was held 4
'thata pollokuan who remainddd In the
servlae of the~olty efter the term for
iihlohhe had been appointed expired;with-
out reappointment;end oontlnued%o aot .
end be reaogalcedby the'olty In his of-
fioial oepsolty,w8s;es 8 de faoto offlo.er,
entitled to competiaebion for'servloesrender-
dd the city end 9ocepted by It. . . ..When,
I .
- _.--
Honorable W. E. Barron~- Pege..5.
however, .thecity ``oeased
-to recogaze him
es 8 de fecto’offlcer,and.Ffused. to per-
mit him ,to.d+schargethe.duties of pollce-
men, It,.Incurredno lleblllty.ior spy.sel-
cry ths$ ,pemight have earned had he been
,ellowed to.oontlnueIn the discharge of the
duties of h$s office.( Copr@re.San Anton’lo
vi Coultreae (1914; Tex. Clv. App.) 169 S.W.
917, 8s olted Bupre, subd. III. And In Uhr
v..‘Bram (1916; Tex, Civ. App.).191 S.W.
379, the,aourt reoognized that It had been
held that e de facto officer oen demand pay
for his services where there are no de jure
claimants.I’
It therefore f.oll&s that slnoe the Veteraw
,;Serv$oeOfficer Is a de facto officer ena the county
.btie
received.the benefits of;;hlsendeavorses such, psy-’
-menteheretofore made.to him would not be an lnyelld 8x1
pendlture of ‘countyfunds. _
Future’paymentsto ‘bemade such offioer pre-
~sehts’
.enotherquestion. 4 method,.bywhich payments
msy Abestopped Is by a..Quo.War,rento
prwzeedingbrought
egainst such.,S~rvlce,’ Article 6253, V.C.S.
Officer-under,
‘.,.’
The Dletrlct Attorney:tifthe.12th.Judlolal
,of the proper
Dlstrlct of T.exas.orthe Counts..Attornes
county;may tl;er,&o%efile en -lnform9tlo``
in..thekst-kra
of 8 Quo Warrant0 proceeding In ‘theDistrlc$.Court
egalnst thk.aald Veterans Servloe Offloer $0 test his
a&W1 r.tghtto hold suoh office, end the County ”
Treasurer.msy withold his se,lery-pendingthe outaome
?f the proceedlhgsi‘(Art,.1713 V.C.S.)
.Your second question .l~s
answered In the nega-
tlve with suggestion,of .a’
~. proper remedy.
SUMMiRY
.A persod Is not qualifted for eppolntm&t I
es Veteran81 County Servloe Offlo-erby ,aCom-
mlesloners~‘Courtunless he has served in the
eative military, navel or armed foroea during
the Spanish-AmericanWar,~World War I, or
.‘WorldWar II, for e period of at least folul
motiths, ‘regardleasof his other quallfloetlons.
.. (Sea. 2, Art. 5798-e-2,V.C .S., Attorneys,
.,Genemlfaopinion IQO.O-6489). .
Bonoreble W. E. Berron - Page 6
Although e Commiseloners1.C&t eppolnts
en lnellglbleperson to the office of,Veter-
ens 1 Oounty Servlae Officer, tf he perfoqms
eervloQs es swh, he is a de f8oCo officeh end
peyments made to him do not~oonstltuteen ll-
legal elpendlture of county funds. (34 Tex.
Jur. 618;:93 A .L.R. 266). The proper method
to oust sn lnellg~oiep&eon from swh office
is by Quo Werrento proueedingsbrought by’the
District Attorne or County Attorney.ofthe
proper 0 eunty. I'.
Art. 6253 V.C.S.)
Yours very truly
4TTORIflZY
GElkR4L OF =A3
.
. .. ”