### WILL WI&ON

.--- ~ENERAX.

.,. 

### Honorabla

Henryiad. +j.strlct

~Attorney Dallas,

Texas **August 1,**  **1957** 

### OpinionN6. W-112 Ret The llablJky~.of theDallas Countyl@.pltal

Metrlct for nsgllg.nt:'~aots

0r its~employebs.and~.tb

*uthority.to.

pur-' chasepublicllablllty in;. suranoe i Youhan:mabmltt.dfor our cawideratloacertain uestlonscatcerning

th..operatlon

of the Dal&. CountyHorplta P Dl.tPl&t.~

Th.~.fir.t..lnvolv..

the llabllltf~~of

tbe'hoepltal

dla-

. IxLotfor ~in~urles2e.ulting from thewgllgent~~otror:aalprao- .ttaui%lt. ,mgentl,

br.aploy.88. ~Th. Dalla.CoontiHoepltal-Qieiklot was 

### araated

under the.aukhorlty.oS



### Seat1011 4 oi.Art1al.r

I&M theTexas

Canatltutlon in themuner **pravid8d** 

### bp,We Tezu%eglulature ln 4rtlcle 

### 44!h, Veraon'Civil 6tatuter..

.Tbr~ho8pltaldlatrl8t 1.r 88- tabllehed

bp an ~leatl~4nlt$gtqd'.ifher by a petltlco.

of 100 reeidelft

quallfled

p.rop&ty~ta%pay$~~



### voterrorby a motionof --the'~Oara\i.&o!iers'~

C@urti::.

Ofiq., .rtr8ate,d

~Xhe..hospltal

district m+rroUw.kithar~ 

### county;of clty+&iity lbpitrl dlstrlcte'. ., 

### The :.' dlsttiiot:

hae'.th. 

### ,pwer.oS

tmtlm 

### to'

#mutent 

### of‘seventy- :flveoedts.per

on.

### hundred

dollar valuation eucbtax to be levled.bythe

### ;Count$ Taz-Assessor 

### Colleotor. a&oollected ln~the.
‘~.stie. mauuer. 

### aa~aouuty~tuee. 

### .The Coiml8eloners~

Courtof the :Q0&~h~si~th~.~poif.r ta~lssu~and~'iill.~obllgatl~ns of. the hos; 'pltal3litzlct

for cwrtruatl*, 

### 'purchare, or enlargement

,of: a ho&ta1,or,hospltal~.ystei, afteran election

authorlalng:

suoh

. ., ', The Board of Msnigere'6i the.hospltal

district

l@ ap1olnted by the Commla.lon.rs I-Court

of 

### the aounty theirdutler ringto manage,controlaud-admlnlster the hosplgalsysteiof 

### the, hosplt8l

di.rtrlctu

,Tlu statute 

### 8p8altiaally provld.8

that theBoard of,Managers ahall-&av..th.



### parer to mi. andbe 

### sued. Zhaddltlo~ .fh.

hO8plttaf.~dilrtrlat

1. g1V.n thi rightand.~pwe,r of eminent

&aul+ The mcordr 

### of hoepltaldistricts organized

underthis 

### statute are subject

to inspection

by the 8tateDepartment ofHonora& Henry Wade, page 2 (Ww-112)

Health and the Commissioners1 Cotirt of the county, and the appropriate prosecuting attorney for the county Is charged with the duty of representing the hospital district in all legal rmatters. There Is little doubt but that a hospital district created under the provlslons of this statute is a governmental entity..., Because of the vieu we take as to the nature of Its purpose irhd operation, It is unnecessary foti.ua to ~detexmlue~ Its ‘exact nature. The courts of Texas have consistently held that the furnishing of hospital services by a munlcipallty ,or county c?nrtltutes a governmental function. Gltv of wv. -,~..107~ fi.W.2d 872 (Tex.Comm.App. 1937). Gartman v. Cltv of &&&~Q,...,IXJ~S.%2d 879 (Tex.Comm.App. 1935). Since the actlvity of operatlng a public hospital of this-type is a governmental actavlty, no llablllty will attaoh for the neglluent acts.of the servauts or e111ploy8es of a hospital district, (41 C.J.S. Hospitals Section 8, Annotation 

### 25 A.L.B.2d 

### 203); m a Falls ‘(I. Bob-, ,121 Tax. 133, 46 8.U.2d 965 of Dallas v. @&$&, supra; &&man v. Cltv of QThe~ef&e; we conclude that the Dallas County Hospltal District, being engaged in a governmental function only, la not liable for the negligent acts or malpractice oi Its agents or employees.

Your second question asks whether, ii our 

### answer to ’ the flrst question doer not lmpose*llablllty on the hospital di&rlct, the hospital district, has authority to Issue a voucher ln paymu+ of preniums on pub&? 1labIlIty lneuranoe wllCl8S i Bectlou 52 or Article III or the Teucas Constitution governs this question, 

### ad reads as follows8

. ?

“The Legislature shall have no power to 

### authorize any county city, 

### town or other political corporattin or sub&vision of the State to lend Its credit or to gr*t public money or thing of value 

### in aid of, or to any lndlvldual~ 

### aasoclatlon or corporation whatsoever’, . . . ’Honorable Henry Uade, page 3 (WI+112)

This office has consistently held, and prdperly so, that the Commlssloners I Court of a county does not have authority to purchase public llablllty insurance covering the operation of governmental functions in which the county would not be liable for the ‘negligent acts of its servants. lons 

### S-55,

v-763, O-1922 and O-5567. We think these ho%& apply to your inquiry. You are, therefore, advised that the Board of Managers of the Dallas County Eospltal Mstrlot does

authority to purchase public liability insurance covnot have erage on the oper&lons of the &strict. -

The personal views of the Attorney Oenerel on this subject are expressed in a dissent to nett Mstrlct, 

### 153Tax. 599, 272 S.W.2d 49 954) v. Brown Counte

.

‘We exprese our appreciation to Assistant District Attorney John Webster 

### forhis able brief which uas 

### mart helpful to our ofrlce * the preparation or this oplnlon.

The Poller County Hospital District 1s not lleble for the negligent act8 or malpractice of its agents or employees. The Hoapltal Dletrlot cannot legally purchase llablllty insurance. ~ovarlng~lts 

### operations. tion. 8ectlon 52, ,Artlole XII, Texas Constltu-

.:‘,:’

JHH:staub

8; Oredy Chtidlir , Chalrmaa 

### Y. V.Geppert .

. Wellace Finfrock ‘ B. H. Tlmmlns, Jr. RRVIEYBO

FORTa ATTORNBY

ORNRRAL &o; P. Blackburn BY: ..