OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAG 

AUSTIN 

@#Dc.mAIm 

--- AT 

Honorable T. 0. Walton, ~raridmt 

Agrfoultural and xoohaaloal co&leg0 0 

Collage Strtion, kxaa 

8 a.8 a minor aad requeat6d 

p&d ?or this mm&or and 

of furthor ruoh ftia la the 

16 0onoernoQ. 

Too have l ubmitteQ to ua 4Aoag with your opinion 

requert the oortifiod 00 y of ju&m+at nferred to. meorporeted in the Judgnuat f s a oopy 0: the potlttoa upon whloh 
Hoaorable T. 0. Walton, Pass 82 

it we8 burred. Brlrfly, the pdltin allegos that Kr. Lynoh 

is wet alnetean years old aad under twwaty-oae. While it 

1s alleged that he reslds8 in flameron Oouata, TOraE, wherr 

he hae barn llvlag with his brother rlnoe the 8uwbr of 

1939, the reason glwa In the applloatlon for do8lrlng hlr 

dlsabllltlee removed Is that hi8 mothsr and father are nonrerld~nta or the State 0r Taxas, that whlla ho clonnldsra hIa6eir a resideat of lbxas, ho in compelled to pay the hhh, 

non-resident student tuition aad that the fuade whloh he 

ha6 available are rush that ke right aot bo able to oonplsto 

his 00110ge tralniog if ha la nquind to &my th8 h&h tuition 

fees ah&rued noa-mrldeat student8 @ad that thenfore from a 

praotloal stand&at, lt 18 essaatlal to hlm to have hlr dlsabllltles removsd In order that ha isay ooaploto his oollogr 

eduoatloa. It 18 said la the patltloa that lf the oourt 

will remove hi8 dlrabllltlrs, than ha oaa legally olala Toxas oltl?mrhlp* and aa ouch, be Irntltlod to attend the 8ald 

oollege by p&g the oorqmatlvoly am11 tuition ohargo 

Twxae rtudents. La th juafpient it 18 found that all 0r 

the 8tatamats and ~allqptlon8 la 8uoh p8tltIoa are true, tket 

m. yaoh r88ldrr la Oamroa aouat 

I’ 

18 bowmen alnoteea and 

two&y--ona years of age, aad that t i8 adrl8able aad to air 

suterlal advantage to have Me dl8abIlltles nmowd. It lr 

also expns8lp fouad *that hi8 father and aother, Wilbur w. 

Lyaoh, &ad norrio Lyaoh, am 8aoh of them llvlag, but are 

non-r88ldontr or the state of Texa8.* 

Subwotloa E of SIotlon 1, Art1010 SdMG, Vmma'8 

civil $titutes, flxe8 the tultloa to bs oharged non-re8ldont 

etudaatn, aad then oontalas the rollowlaer 

A non-resident rtudaat ia hrnbr deflaed*&+'bi a 8tudsnt or 1086 than twenty-on* 

(81) pare 0r a&e, living away fro0 hi8 f&U 

aad whorrr famllp roeidea In another State, or 

wboee rcanrily ha8 reolded within thla State fWr 

a period of time less than twalva (le) month8 

prior to the date or awglstratlon, or a student 

or twaaty-one (al) years 0r ego or over who raside8 out of the State or who hae rasided,wIthin tha State ror a period or leas thaa tw&vi) 

(18) month@ prior to the data of regI8tratioa.* 
149 

Honorable T. 0. Walton, Fag0 3 

Under the above definition, th8 student in queetlon is Oltiatly a non-resldWit, ~ale88 ho has boon resaued 

by the judgniont readers4 in the DiStriQt Court of Caaeron 

couaty. ror the rea8on6 hereinafter appearing, w8 are of 

the view that euoh judgxieat ha8 not ohaa&ed the StlltUS of 

this minor as a non-raeldent und&r the above rrtatute. 

Artloles 5021 and 6922, Veraoa*o Civil 8tatute8, 

read as follower 

"Art:010 6921. Minors above the age of 

niaeteoa yearis, where it shall eggmar to 

thalr matsrla2 advantage, msy have tholr dieebllitlea 0r rlnorlty removed, Sd be thenarter hold, ror all legal QUQO8~8, 0r full 

age, oroapt aa to the right to vote.* 

*Artiole 5022. The p<lon for euoh sof&Oval shall stab the grounda rellod on, 

whether the parents of the adaor am llvl.nq 

or &owl, and the aama and rcridoaoe of 0aoh 

living parant. Suoh potition shall k 8~0111 

to by the fatbar or mother or rid minor or 

by any other oredlblo pereoa oogniaant of Mm 

faote, and shall ba tlLe4 in the Dlrtrlat 

Court of the Oounty where the minor ra814~8, 

and 8 hoarlng he4 on say day of any terni of 

said Cotrrt, or duriag a vaaatlon of eald CO&~%. 

Prov:dod that in DiStri0t Courts sf DicltrlOte 

hwing ni0re than one.00unty withi.5 SuOh DiStriot, upon the riling of suoh petition for 

naval Of disabllltlas, in the 00UBty inwhloh 

8uOh minor resides, the DiStriUt 3Udge Of ml4 

COW rary hold suah hsarinp; and ramwe the dlr8biliti.68 Of Suoh &OS, in anJ @XUlty WithhI 

euoh Dlrtrlot wherein hb mey br then ho~dl~ 

Court or way be found. Am aiaended Aotr, 1939, 

46th Led., p. 499, 8 1." 

Artiole SSG3, Reviead Civil $tatutee, aontains 

oert.ei,n regulations pertaining to citation and prooedure. 

The88 8tatut88 oOnertituto all the statutory law in thil, 

state on the rubjrot 0r reawal or dieabilitlm or 0lnore. 

Th8 laot sentence la &rtiCle lfQO8 -8 not ia the statute 

uatll it was a&&s& by an eaend~nt amth by the Forty-sixth 
150 

Honorable T. 0. Walton, page 4 

Legislature. Prior to such amendmmt It had been firmly 

a8tabliehed that thm requirement oi Article S92& thut the 

petltlon be tiled in the county whom the minor resided 

was a jurisdlotlonal one. CUnninf&na V8. Roblron, IS6 S. 

W. 441; Durrlll vs. Robiuon, 138 8. XT. 101. Obvloua4 the 

only relaratlon fro& the old atatutr made by the aramdnieat 

was to permit tha proceedIn to ba had in mother oountr 

in the sama Judioial district when the judge should k holding oourt or for come other masoa be found In woh oth8r 

county. Bowetm, resldenos of the minor within the dlstrlot was loft jurisdiatioual. Court decisions arising under the old statutr are plainly applicable to the umnded 

not, except aa above stated, and the qumtlon before us 

does not involve that exosptlon. 

We quote in full tha opinion of Chief Justice 

Brown, In burr111 w. Robl8on, eupr8, a6 ?ollorrarr 

“It appears from the juQF,wmt ot the dlstrict oourt of Traris Oeuat~‘, purporting to 

muova the dleabllitiss of relator, that she was 

not B resident of the oounty of Travis wlthln 

the meaning of the mtututo. Her aopllcation 

showa that she oam to TraYlo OOWity iOr the 

purpose of gsttlng her dlsrbilitlee rexzoved, 

and that sha intended as (100~3 ae she accoi?ipllshed 

that purposs to rntura to Bl Baso eouaty. The 

oourt reciter In its order that rhe is tempcrrrily a resident or Travis aountp. The atatuts provides that the prooeading must bo had 

In th8 oouaty where the mfner malde8, and, It 

appurlw upon $hs$aee o? the prooeodin& that 

ahe Aid nnt reside in Travis eauaty, the ardor 

is void. Ounnfngham v. Bobleon, 1% 8. W. Ml. 

Being a &nor, the relator Is not qualltlad to 

purchase ths kid. 

Tt Is therefore ordered that the motion 

be ovdrti~d, at t&o oo8t OZ the re’lator.* 

lrroea the opinion ot the supreme Court in in Q. C. 

a s. 0. Ry. co. IS. LmomI, me 8. w. 7s. w8 quote1 

It la oortain that the Umaioilo and 

r.a/d:;ro; if T. $. LomoBs, under any &.aSiJq 

whloh may be usoribed to thoee words, ~66 in 

Parkor oouoty until his m&oval. to Dollar and 
151 

Ronorabla T. 0. WiltOA, Pa@ 5 

hle alleged e&fmoIpation; for T. E. Lemma, wae 

living IA mrkcr county and that aae the domioile or frlo iether, end It la oettled law IA 

Texas that the domicile at a &LAOS' child io alway6 that or the father, snC necossarlly ohanpss 

with any om3~8 Or t.hs fdtkxs*s ao;ii0ih. RUtb8011 I. Randolph, 11 %x. 4b8; Fraaks v. Ffmoook, 

1 Poecry, mrsp. Caa. 561, SOP?; Lm~l~g t. megory, 

100 Tmr. 314, JlS, 99 6. W. 542, 10 L. R. A. (Hp. 

s.) 490, 1eS An. St. Rep. 809; First State Bank 

V. FFIiA, lb7 S. W. 4154. The XWasOn tar this 

rule is given by J&e Whoalar IA tlM following 

lbn&,mpe OS Judge Story ir his C4Pillot of Laws, 

motion 441 

~*xi~or8 are gtmerally bema inoap4ble, 

proprio surte, ol ohanelog their dorsloile, during their sIaority.* Hardy f. Da LOOA. Tex. 

237. 

aSchoular statme: 

**The doxlcils zt or?,& raalna until 

another i6 laWfully 40v;UixOdt f&Ad, siAUe ti~Crs 

arm Aot 8ui juries, thmy m%y not change tbrlr 

danioile dUrIA% their minoritf, though t&ey PJLJ 

rhea Of 1~11 age.' sohoular*r Do;tsstIO Relstions, 

p. 313. 

"It la obvloue that the diaablllty of a I&- 

nor to errsOt E chaaga of doulCfle by aot of hi8 

will rests at least in large mmm2e on his prommed lack oi oapaitp to fan tha the Intention, 

WhIOh 18 t&8 all-iaportant rle3ent 10 l ffecting 

euob a ob'l@e, AAd the l&W mkes A0 bfSti30tiOD~ 

with respect to thi$ laok of ospacity at the raryIng stage8 of ntnority; the presuuptloc being t5a 

aaam at 10 ye6ars a8 et 18 &orths. BIAoe them is 

AO important dlffarenoe bstwmn the intention required to srreot a change 0r dc~iolla and to offeat 8 ahanpe of r~sidmnce, wbdmvmr the word 

*realUanoe* Is used io the 6enm of a 5cma fixed 

by inteotion, ooAaurrIDg wit& bodily pmamIMa, it 

au& be held that the di#sbllIty, whlob prevents 

the plllnor, through ,11&a?% of capecit~l to hare the 

53 Fed. 311; In h Catmon’a E8tat0, 18 Pa. GO. Ct. 

R. 31E2, 214." 
3.52 

Honorable T. 0. ualton, ~a(gr 6 

The oase of Laanning va. Oregiwy, 99 S. W. 549, 

was a habeas corpus case involving the ouat0ay or a ohila. 

FlVm the OplnlOn Of the Su~rsBm COWA th8r8iQ, We q'lOt8: 

Ws answer the rlrat question that the 

ao~lcile or the lnrant rouowea that 0r the 

father, and, uson the change of the rather.8 

a0nii0ih rrom ~eras to ~ouislnna, the inrant.8 aOrolciis W~II lik~~i8e changed. . . 

"To ths thlra Question we snswer, the 

Ohild being in the lawful ourtody of the 

rather, his a3ffii0iia ~88 in the atats or 

Laulslana, ana the al&riot oourt or Bunt 

oo\:nty ala nat acquire jurlsalotion or the 

ohlla by raa~J.On of his temporary prssenoe in 

the stat. of Texas. That oourt baa no autharity to adjudge 0 ohangs 0r relation betwsen 

the fsther and the child. Brown on Jurlealotlon, 290." . . I 

t;. ., I,,, '7 

On the above point w6 olte also, Emnk 18. Fsln, 

157 S*iY* 454; 15 T6X. JUr. p* 715; 19 C. J. p. 411; Wight 

VS. Wright, 285 $. ‘VS. 909. 

The juagnmnt in the rsmval of alsabllltlee pro000aing shows up0n its raos that this younpl mo*s paronta 

w8re non-residents br Texae. ~8 8 ihatter or raot the r0- 

03ra shows that It was the noo-realdsnoe or auoh psrente, 

in V~SW of Art1010 Ea?Ho, whloh prsoipftatsa the ?rOOfJOaing 

ana produced the advantage relied on tc obtain relier. From 

the authorities cited above, lt 1s 0,lear that the minor*s 

resia8n00 0r doJ2icm was test 0r his wrem3. Laok or juritidiction 1s thus arflmativsly shown in the order it5eir. 

From Cunningham vs. Roblson, 138 9. W. 441, by 

the Su~rena Court, we quota: 

*The author1t.y here aonfarred upon the dlstrict court is not judicial ln its charaoter, 

but 1s a ~pealal authority, oxtside of the OonBtftutional gowertl of tb court. In such alar8 

of OUSTS the jud@wM or order entered by the 

GQUrt iS not 8ntithd to ti38 prOsuptian Or Vuity, 08peaially a23 to the juriedlotlon 0r the 

court, aa would be th8, O~Y(I where the tuAOtiOA 

psrformd was that of the ordinary juUlcla1 

poverir of the court. $rown v. Gheal.ook, 73 Tax. 
153 

Ror;orclbls 11. 0. %dton. page 7 

385, 12 S. S. 111, 8U: %:arIco 0. k'oElroy, 67 

kiss. 547, 7 South, 4G8; Iilndrmn v. C*Conzor, 

54 Arc. t27, 16 S. W. 1052, 13 L. Fi. A. 490. 

. . ." 

Cur oglolcn follows that the order of the Dlstrlct Court of Cm&r00 County rrttet.pting to rm0ve the dieablll:ies of thla &nor Goes not affect hln status as a 

non-re&3ent under 26540. And, olnoe hs 1s under twentyon8 years of OgS Und his parent8 reside Outrrlde the Stat@ 

he Is a non-resident -#ithin the meaning of the statute and 

subject to tko payment of the rae8 provided In sub-par+ 

graph 2 0r Section 1 or sala.Article 26540. 

Yours vfsry truly 

ATTORNZY UBiZiIAL OF TEYA‘Z 

Glans R. Low18 

Asslotant 

APPROVEDOCT 25, 1940 

u++--Ll 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS