THE ATTORXEY GENERAL 

OF TEXAS 

June 3, 1987 

.nx MA.l”rox 

XrroRNEY DEXVERAI. 

Honorable Mark H. Dettman 

Midland County Attorney 

P. 0. Box 2559 

Midland, Texas 79702 

Opinion No. ~~-717 

Re: Liability of the state for 

postage, telegraph and telephone 

expenses of the district attorney 

and district judges of Midland 

county 

Dear Mr. Dettman: 

You request an opinion 

concerning the liability of the state of Texas to 

pay for the postage, telegraph, and telephone 

expenses of the district judges and district 

attorney of Midland County under the provisions of 

sectidns 24.019 and 43.004 of the Government Code. 

Section 24.019 of the Government Code, Expenses of District 

Judge, provides: 

(a) A district judge engaged in the discharge 

of official duties in a county other than the 

judge’s county of residence is entitled to 

traveling and other necessary expenses, as 

provided by the Travel Regulations Act of 1959 

(Article 6823a, Vernon’s Texas Civil Statutes). 

(b) A district judge is entitled to receive 

from the state the actual and necessary postage, 

telegraph, and telephone expenses incurred in the 

discharge of official duties. 

(c) The expenses shall be paid by the state on 

a sworn itemized account showing the expenses. 

Section 43.004, Expenses, states: 

(a) A district attorney engaged in the 

discharge of official duties in a county other 

than the district attorney’s county of residence 

is entitled to traveling and other necessary 

p. 3331 
Eonorable Mark H. Dettman - Page 2 (JM-717) 

expenses, as provided by the Travel Regulations 

Act of 1959 (Article 6823a, Vernon's Texas Civil 

Statutes). 

(b) A district attorney is entitled to receive 

from the state the actual and necessary postage, 

telegraph, and telephone expenses incurred in the 

discharge of official duties. 

(c) The expenses shall be paid by the state on 

a sworn itemized accouot showing the expenses. 

You state that it is the position of Midland County that the 

state of Texas is obligated to pay for the necessary postage, 

telephone and telegraph expenses of the district judges and district 

attorney of Midland County under the foregoing provisions of the 

Government Code. The Comptroller of Public Accounts takes the 

position that sections 24.019 and 43.004 apply to district judges and 

district attorneys of multi-county districts and that the state 

comptroller is limited to payment of those expenses incurred while in 

the performance of duties in a county other than in the county of the 

official's residence. 

Midland County is not part of a multi-county judicial district. 

Govt. Code 4924.243, 24.415. 

Article 6820, V.T.C.S., was the origin of sections 24.019 and 

43.004. Article 6820 was repealed by Acts 1985. 69th Leg., ch. 480, 

826, at 2049, effective September 1, 1985. It was carried forward in 

enactment of the Government Code, a nonsubstantive revision of the 

statutes, by Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 480, at 1720. effective 

September 1, 1985. Article 6820, Judicial District Expenses, 

provided: 

All district judges and district attorneys when 

engaged in the discharge of their official duties 

in any county in this state other than the county 

of their residence, shall be allowed their 

traveling and other necessary expenses, as 

provided by the Travel Regulations Act of 1959, 

while actually engaged in the discharge of such 

duties. Such officers shall also receive the 

actual and necessary postage, telegraph and 

telephone expenses incurred by them in the actual 

discharge of their duties. Such expenses shall be 

paid by the state upon the sworn and itemized 

account of each district judge or attorney 

entitled thereto, showing such expenses. 

p. 3332 
Honorable Mark H. Dettman - Page 3 (~~-717) 

Attorney General Opinion V-306 (1947) construed article 6820 at 

a time when specified amounts were set out for each county in the 

multi-county district, but otherwise was in the same substantive form 

as it appears herein. It stated: 

A District Attorney is entitled to be paid all 

actual and necessary expenses incurred by him in 

the discharge of his duties in counties outside of 

his home county not to exceed the limitation as to 

amounts contained in the statute. Art. 6820, Rev. 

Civ. Stat. 

In Attorney General Opinion JM-670 (1987). we quoted with 

approval, a well known rule of construction set forth in Attorney 

General Opinion M-650 (1970). There it was stated: 

Another fundamental rule requires that a 

statute be construed as a whole and that all of 

its parts be harmonized if possible, so as to give 

effect to the entire act according to the evident 

intention of the legislature. . . . [T]he Court 

will endeavor to reconcile the various provisions 

of the act, insofar as they nay appear to be 

conflicting or inconsistent, to the end that the 

enactment and every word, phrase, clause, and 

sentence may have its proper effect. 

Each part of the statute is to be considered in 

connection with every other part and with the 

entire enactment, in order to produce a harmonious 

whole and to reach the true legislative intent. 

Thus, in case of doubt as to the meaning of a 

particular word, clause, provisions, or section, 

it is to be viewed in the light of all the 

language employed. It follows that a provision 

will not be given a meaning out of harmony with 

other provisions and inconsistent with the purpose 

of the act, although it would be susceptible of 

such construction standing alone. 53 Tex. Jur. 2d 

229-32, Statutes, Sec. 160. 

While the re-enactment of article 6820 into sections 24.019 

and 43.004 of the Government Code suffers loss of clarity in the 

transition, we believe there is no substantive change. When subsections (b) of sections 24.019 and 43.004 are isolated, it would 

appear that a district judge and a district attorney are entitled to 

receive from the state the actual and necessary postage, telegraph, 

and telephone expenses incurred in the discharge of official duties 

without regard to the composition of the district or residence of the 

p. 3333 
Eonorable Mark H. Dettman - Page 4 (JM-717) 

judge. liowever, when subsections (b) are read in connection with 

other portions of the statute, a different result is dictated. 

It is our opinion that the state of Texas is not liable for the 

postage, telegraph and telephone expenses of the district judge and 

district attorney of Midland County under the provisions of sections 

24.019 and 43.004. 

This construction of sections 24.019 and 43.004 appears to be 

consistent with amounts budgeted for these offices in the General 

Appropriations Act. Section 7 of article IV of the Act provides an 

amount for 

District Attorneys' expenses while engaged in the 

actual performance of their duties, not to exceed 

$1,500 per1 county when the judicial district 

is composed of more than one county. (Emphasis 

supplied). 

General Appropriations Act, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 980, art. IV, 

$7, at budget 438 (IV-22). 

1. In a brief submitted by the comptroller of public accounts 

it is pointed out that the district attorney of Midland County is 

eligible to practice law, and under the General Appropriations Act is 

entitled to receive $13,650 from the state for certain expenses per 

year as a prosecutor with a single county district. Section 9 of 

article IV of the Act provides: 

For the payment of salaries of Assistant District 

Attorneys, Investigators and/or secretarial help 

and expenses, including travel for these personnel 

as determined by the District Attorney, Criminal 

District Attorney and County Attorneys designated 

in Items No. 4., S., 8., 11.. 12.. and 15. Payment 

shall not exceed $27.650 per district per year 

in multi-county districts and $13,650 per district per year in single-county districts. . . . 

(Emphasis supplied). 

General Appropriations Act, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 980, art. IV, 

19, at budget 439 (IV-23). 

The comptroller has furnished us with copies of vouchers from the 

Midland County District Attorney for the last fiscal year for the 

amount of $13,650.00. 

p. 3334 
Honorable Mark H. Dettman - Page 5 (JM-717) 

Section 2 of article IV of the Act provides: 

District Judges' expenses while engaged in the 

actual performance of their duties, not to exceed 

$1,500 per county when the judicial district 

is composed of more than one county. (Emphasis 

supplied). 

General Appropriations Act, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 980, art. IV, 

$2. at budget 437 (IV-21). 

SUMMARY 

The state of Texas is not liable for the 

postage, telegraph and telephone expenses of the 

district judge and district attorney of Midland 

County under the provisions of sections 24.019 and 

43.004 of the Government Code. 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

JACK HIGHTOWER 

First Assistant Attorney General 

MART KELLER 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

JIJDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY 

Special Assistant Attorney General 

RICK GILPIN 

Chairman, Opinion Committee 

Prepared by Tom G. Davis 

Assistant Attorney General 

p. 3335