OFFICE OF THE AmORNEY GENERAL OF TEIXAG 

AUSTIN 

!ifonorabls John D. Resd, Caamieslonoa~ 

Bureau of Labor Stctlstioa 

Auatfn, Tern6 

Dear Sir: 0plnlon 90. o-SB70 

Ra: (1) Is.lt moemary for aa employer to recognlza a wag* aaslgcasnt Of'OilS of his enlployesr 

without firat balng advlso& by 

the perllon h0laiq !he wage (LEslgttmtnt? 

This is $a ndvlsa that wa knva given oar&l oonelderatilon to the questions ststatl’above, pursuant to your 

opinion request of rsoent data. 

man Texas mrlsprudenoe wo quote the rollowing 

pertinent statement of tha lawt 

“1 Wawe. - Uagos are pro~orty, subject 

t3 sold or assignment 08 other property. But 

an asalgnmmt of wage8 to aoerue in the future 

is not qalld, ualess the expeoted wages are ta 

be earned un&ar m axlstln~~ em?Joymel;t or the 

future araploymant 1s known and iQsn~i;~; “,t 

the tc?la tlAe assi@lz~snt Is Faiide. . 

ease there nay ba E ro::aonabl?r ewotatlcn on 

?h0 ,xrt of ths psrtic!a f.bt tiln wap3o will 

be earned, and such posoiPillty Is ooupled 

with a.3 iutarsat, and ths right to reoeive 

thdm, though liable to bs defeated, is vested. 

This bei= th,a oase, ages may be aasip,md 

_ unless the oontraot of employment stipulates 

to the eontrarj. Orbinaxliy It doaa not a?- 

782 
Honorable John D. Reed, Commiesioner, Page 2 

peer necessary to obtain the assent of,the 

employer to the aselgnment -untlar an oxiat1% contr3ct, but, if the employer consents, 

",PLi:: &me amuraace to the assigMerit.' 

(6 hx. Jur. 14, I ll) 

Cams cited, 31~6 whloh are in accord wlth the 

tttutets.e5t Or the tte: &WCneely v. Armstrong, (Clv. App.) 

2l.2 S. m. 179; Ibid, (Sup. Ct. anmerlng aertifisd quoetfon) 109 Tex. 363 21C S. y. 1921 Brand v. hat., 109 

Tax. Cr. R. 96, 3 4. H. @Xl) 4%. See also 2 Ruling Case 

Law, 1 12, pp. 603 and 604; 6 Corpus Jurle 915. 

Therotora, we answer the first quostfon In the 

afrirzetive, under existing authorities, with the important y,ual.irioation that if the contract of employment 8fiDUlatos to the contra= the employer would t bs re3ulroU 6 

honor any assignment &less notlcs be ilrsrgiven aad a& 

ntsd sqrese or imDUeQ. Reef 9. Ml16 Novelty 40, 

f& . & p .6) 7 8. w. ( 2421 4 2, lfha (COEBQ, *pp.) d 

Tex. 380, 89 3. ?f. (2d) 210. 

With refersnoa to the seaond question propounded 

by you, we have examined the statutes an4 find the mquinmnt that the wi?e join in a wage as8lgtment made by a 

married man only in Article 6166as, 7ernonva Annotatsd Civil 

Statutes, regulating "loan brokeran. SeatiOn 6 of @alA 

articb reads in gert as r03..mm 

“. . . Thet eadh assig5nent oiwagee . . . 

shall be void unlses the same be x!nMe and given 

with the orneent or tho wife, and such ootisent 

shall be evidenoed by the wife joining in the 

assignctent. . . .* 

Tha only oaae passing upon the ap&ioabllity of 

the above statute Is by a blvided Court Of civil AppMlS in 

the case of &~soti Y. bwn, 226 S. W. 829. The tijorit 

opinion In that case holds that a ohatte3 mortgag&*e I&e 

nesd not jo:n in the eseoutlon 01 the ohattel mortgage u1zless same is me&e to a "loan brokeP. It la raid that the 

faot that the husband alone signed the mortgage would not 

make it void, CB 9mmmuaity property, as here, may be disposed of by the husband only." 
Honorable $ohn D. &ad, Page 3 

l'he dissenting opinion in tbc ease strongly 

uqes,thc stetute to be broad cnou& to aover transactlone 

with any oreditor hnd lioJgea, J. poaae the following qaeutionr 

*. . . TLy should a married man in ordar 

to acoure a loam be persitted to as&n hie 

waecs or mortpge h%s household end kitchen 

Surniture tc a bank, or any other oreditor 

without the cones& or' hie wife, an4 not be 

em&tteiY to enjoy the 8112110 liberty when eeek- 

% et+l.osn -, tromaloanbrokcr? The hard8hip8 

rClttit$~ frOE SUOh tI'lUl8flOtiOA~ grOW 0th Of 

the creation and axlotonco of t&e lien, and 

not from the ohwaotcr of the lisaholder. 0 . . . 

Gvcrtheleca the nnijority opinion rs&rlotS the 

eoope or 3eotion 6 Of &Mole 6163e, qpra, t8Sg&@y only 

to loan brokers, ana It is evlaanb that the en&tin&~ 18 

0rr60tiv0 only nhfm an a6siipmnti in ma0 to a ioa~ broker. 

We firsd no moor4 of wrtt Of SrrOr iA the &lerrOA Va (&en 

oasb, stqwe, nor any other decision by our Teams crourtr 

011 th@ QUWtiOYi. 

You arc thereiors rerp0atrully adated that the 

wlfa is-not required to jOfA IA a wag0 awigAmoAt Of the 

hwband, trade to any other peawon than a,loan broksr.as 

a0rined by'3eotion e of &tlols 6133nt 

*A loan broker ir a person firm, or 

oorporation who pursues the bu$ucaa of leudiq money purchasing salaries tttta taking 

for srourity for the payment 0r such 1os.o end 

intereet thereon en ae8igument oi wee or 

utaYgnmnt of wages with Pow9r or httorrrcp to 

oolltwt the nsme or other order r0r unpaid 

ohattel mortgage or bill of sale upon. household or Icitohcn rUniturf+" 

The QbOV0 Wad take Out Of the OpWt3tiOA Of ths 

8ttitUt0 OAO WhO W?OCptCd Q Wwe t%sttigoPient ior goodtt, =%'0 

and mer0hanandise aold an6 dcliveredr