THEATTO~~NEY GENERAL 

OPTEXAS 

Col. Homer Garrison, Jr. 

Director 

Opinion No. C-125 

Texas Department of Public Safety Re : Under the provisions of S. B. 

Austin, Texas 451, Acts 58th Leg., amending Art. 

911b, V.C.S., if the owner of a truck 

leases such vehicle without a driver 

to any person other than a common 

carrier, contract carrier or *pecialised motor carrier, will such 

owner be considered to be transporting property for compensation or 

Dear Col. Garrison: hire, and related questions. 

In your recent letter you requested an opinion of this office on the 

recently enacted Senate Bill 451, Acts 58th Legislature, Chapter 451, page 

1316, which amended Article 911b, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, by adding paragraph (j) to Section 1. The questions you asked are as follows: 

“1. Under this amendment, if the owner of a truck 

leares such vehicle without a driver to any person other 

than a common carrier, contract carrier or specialized 

motor carrier, will such owner be considered to be transporting property for compensation or hire ? 

“2. If the owner of a truck leases such vehicle to 

any person other than a common carrier, contract carrier, or specialized motor carrier and is employed by 

the lessee as a driver, will such owner be considered 

to be transporting property for compensation or hire? 

“3. If the owner bf a truck leases such vehicle 

without a driver, but with a provision that a driver 

must be secured through the Texas Employment Commission, to any person other than a common carrier, contract carrier or specialized motor carrier. will such 

owner be considered to be transporting property for compensation or hire? 

-618- 
Col. Homer Garrison, Jr,, Page 2 (C-125) 

“4. If the lessee of a truck not being a motor carrier or contract carrier secures a driver for such vehicle through Manpower, Inc., would the lessor be considered to be transporting property for compensation 

or hire? 

“Manpower, Inc., is an organization that has as its 

primary business the furnishing of employees of different skills or trades to other business organizations upon 

request. Manpower, Inc., pays these employees and 

maintains ail payroll records including the withholding 

of taxes and social security benefits. The business organization requesting an employee from Manpower, Inc., 

has complete control of the employee except that payment for such employee’s services is made to Manpower, 

Inc., who withholds a commission or fee for handling 

the account. In practice, the employee performs his work 

for the business organization just as any other employee 

of such organization but draws no salary except from 

Manpower, Inc. 

“5. In the four preceding questions, what would be 

your interpretation if the lessee was a common carrier, 

contract carrier or specialized motor carrier? ” 

Article 911b, Section 1 is the section of the Motor Carrier Act 

which defines the terms used in the Act. It provides that: 

“When used in this Act unless expressly stated 

otherwise.” (Then follow the various definitions) 

Senate Bill 451 amended this Section 1 by adding a paragraph (j), defining 

the term “transporting property for compensation or hire” which provides 

in its material parts as follows: 

” ’ (j) The term transporting property for compensation or hire shall include the furnishing during the same 

period of time of equipment.and drivers to persons, firms, 

copartnerships, associations or joint-stock associations 

other than common carriers, contract carriers, or specialized motor carriers for use in their carrier operations whether the equipment and drivers are furnished by 

the same or separate person, firm, co-partnership, 

association or joint-stock association, and their lessees, 

-619- 
Col. Homer Garrison, Jr., Page 3 (C-125) 

receivers or trustees appointed by any court whatsoever owning, controlling; managing, operating or 

causing to be operated any motor-propelled vehicle.’ ” 

The effect of this amendment is to make the term (phrase) “transporting property for compensation or hire” where it appears in Section 1 (g) 

and 1 (h) and other sections of the Motor Carrier Act, include the furnishing during the same period of time of equipment and drivers to persons, 

firms, etc. 

The amendment provides that the transporting of property for compensation or hire shall include the furnishing during the same period of time 

the equipment and drivers “whether the equipment and drivers are furnished by the same or separate person, firm, 

joint-stock association and their lessees . . , 

co-partnership, association or 

owning, controlling, managing, 

operating or causing to be operated any motor propelled vehicle.” It seems 

apparent that the Legislature by its language intended to include the furnishing of the equipment and the driver within the meaning of the term “transporting property for compensation or hire.” The language would be meaningless under any other kind of an analysis. If both the equipment and drivers 

are furnished during the same period of time, even if furnished by “separate 

person, firm, . . . ” etc., the transportation would be for compensation or hire 

under the language of the statute. In other words, to be unregulated transportation, within the meaning of Paragraph (j), the person owning the commodity 

being transported must furnish either the truck sr the driver. If both the 

equipment and drivers are furnished by the same or separate persons other 

than the owner of the commodity being transported the transportation is for 

compensation or hire. 

It is, therefore, our opinion that an owner of a truck who leases such 

vehicle without a driver will be considered to be transporting property for 

compensation or hire as he is furnishing “equipment” in the terms of the 

statute only if the drivers are being furnished by a separate person’or firm 

other than the lessee. This, of course, does not include the furnishing of 

equipment and drivers to common carriers, contract carriers or specialized 

motor carriers for use in their carrier operations. (See answer to question 

No. 5) 

In answer to your second question, it is our opinion that a person 

leasing a truck to be employed in the transportation of commodities over 

the highways of The State of Texas, and being employed by the lessee as a 

driver would be considered to be transporting property for compensation or 

hire over the highways of The State of Texas as he is, in addition to furnish- 

-620- 
Col. Homer Garrison, Jr., Page 4 (C-125) 

ing the truck, also furnishing the driver (himself). He is furnishing both 

the “equipment” and “driver” within the terms of the statute. Again, this 

does not include the furnishing of equipment and drivers to common carriers, 

contract carriers or specialized motor carriers for use in their carrier 

operations. 

Inasmuch as we have answered your first question to the effect 

that the leasing of a truck and the furnishing of drivers by the same or 

separate persons would be considered to be transporting property for compensation or hire, our answer to your third question must be in the negative. 

Here the drivers would be employed by the lessee. The fact that the Texas 

Employment Commission referred such drivers to the lessee would not 

mean that the Commission was furnishing drivers within the terms of the 

statute. Therefore, all we have here is the lease of the equipment, and, 

as the drivers are not being furnished by the same or separate persons, the 

transportation would not be considered for compensation or hire under this 

statute; 

Ollr answer to question number four is in the affirmative. The truck 

being furnished by one person and the drivers furnished by Manpower, Inc., it 

would follow that both the equipment and drivers are furnished by separate persons which within the terms of the statute is considered to be transporting 

property for compensation or hire. 

By virtue of the proviso in Paragraph (j) which reads: “other 

than common carriers, contract carriers, or specialized motor carriers for 

use in their carrier operations” if equipment and drivers are furnished to 

common carriers, contract carriers or specialized motor carriers, the operations described in your first four questions would not be included in the term 

“transporting property for compensation or hire” as used in said Paragraph 

(j), and said four questions would be answered in the negative. 

We express no opinion as to whether the furnishing of such equipment and/or drivers to common carriers, contract carriers, or specialized 

motor carriers is a violation of any other section of Article 911b, Vernon’s 

Annotated. Civil ,Statutes. 

SUMMARY 

The furnishing of both the truck and drivers by the same 

or separate persons is considered to be the transporting 

of property for compensation or hire within the meaning 

of Article 911b, Section l(j), Vernon’s Civil Statutes, only 

-621- 
, 

, 

Col. Homer Garrison, Jr., Page 5 (C-125) 

in the event such furnishing is to entities other than common carriers, contract carriers, or specialized motor 

carriers. 

Yours very truly, 

WAGGONER CARR 

Norman V. Suarez 

k 

/ 

Assistant Attorney Gen ral 

NVS: nb 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

Murray Jordan 

Gordon Zuber 

W-0. Shultz 

Pat Bailey 

APPROVEDFOR THEATTORNEYGENERAL 

BY: Albert P. Jones 

-622-