The Attorney General of Texas 

April 9, 1979 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

Honorable Gibson D. (Gibl Lewis 

Chairman 

House Committee on 

Intergovernmental Affairs 

Opinion No. Mw-10 

Re: Whether a regional transit 

authority established under article 

State Capitol 

Austin, Texas 

lllSx, V.T.C.S., is covered by the 

Tort Claims Act 

Dear Representative Lewis: 

You have requested our opinion as to whether the Texas Tort Clalms 

Act, article.625249, V.T.C.S., his applicable to a regional transit authority 

created pursuant toarticle lll6x, V.T.C.S. The Tort Claims Act applies to 

every “unit of government” in the state, section 3, but it is not applicable 

“to any proprietary function of a municipality.” Section 16(a). You ask 

whether a regional transit authority falls within the exception of section 16. 

Since it is our view that a’reglonal transit authority does not exercise any 

proprietary functicn, we need not address the question of whether it may be 

deemed a “municipality” for purposes of article 6252-B. 

It is clear that a regional transit authority created pursuant to article 

lll6x, defined as a “public body corporate and politic,” section 6(a), ls a “unit 

of government” within the meaning of the Tort Claims Act. Section S(a) of 

article lll6x provides that a duly created authority exercises 

public and essential governmental functions, [and 

has] all the powers necessary or convenient to carry 

out and effectuate the purposes and provisions of this 

Act, including, but not limited to, the following. . . : 

. . . . 

(e) . . . the power to acquire, construct, complete, 

develcp, own, operate and maintain a [rapid transit] 

system or systems within its boundaries . . . 

(Emphasis added). Under the language of the statute, then, the operation of 

a rapid transit system by an authority is described as a “governmental 

function.” 

p. 27 
Honorable Gibson D. (Gib) Lewis - Page Two (NW-101 

In City of Corsicana v. Wren, 317 B.W.2d 516 (Tex. 1956), the Supreme Court 

considered a statute containing a legislative declaration that a municipality’s operation of 

an airport is a governmental functicn. The court held that, so long as 

the legislative classification as governmental (or nongovernmental) 

CnMot be called arbitrary or clearly at vah3nCe with ‘well 

established and well defined’ law on the subject, the classification 

ought to be respected by the courts. 

317 S.W.2d at 520. We do not believe that the classification at issue here mav be so 

labeled. & Imperial Production Corp. v. City of Sweetwater, 210 P.2d 917 (5th Ci;. lSS4); 

Braun v. Trustees of Victoria Independent School District, ll4 S.W.2d 947, 950 (Tex. Clv. 

App Ban Antonio 1936, writ ref’d); Garaa v. Bdinburg Consolidated School District, 576 

S.W:2d916 (Tex. Civ. App. - Corpus Christi 1979); Pontarelli Trust v. City of McAllen, 

465 B.W.2d 604 (Tex. Civ. App. - Corpus Christi 1971, no writ). In our opinion, Wren 

compels the conclusion that the legislature is authorized to classify the powersregional transit authority as exclusively governmental. As a result, it is our view that the 

Tort Claims Act is applicable to a regional transit authority created pursuant to article 

lll6x. 

SUMMARY 

The Texas Tort Claims Act, article 6252-19, V.T.C.B., is applicable 

to a regional transit authority created pursuant to article lll6x, 

V.T.C.S. 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

TED L. HARTLEY 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Rick Gilpin 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

C. Robert Heath, Chairman 

David B. Brooks 

p. 28 
Honorable Gibson D. (Gib) Lewis - Page Three (Mw-10) 

Rick Gilpin 

William G Reid 

Bruce Youngblood 

p. 29