The Attorney General of Texas 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

Supreme Court Building 

P. 0. Box 12546 

Austin, TX. 76711. 2546 

5121475~2501 

Telex 9101674-1367 

Teleccxier 512/475.0266 

1607 Main St., Suite 1400 

Dallas, TX. 75201.4709 

2141742-6944 

4624 Alberta Ave., Suite 160 

El Paso. TX. 79905-2793 

9151533.3464 

1220 Dallas Ave., Suite 202 

Houston. TX. 77002.6966 

7131650-0666 

606 Broadway, Suite 312 

Lubbock, TX. 79401-3479 

6061747-5238 

4309 N. Tenth, Suite B 

McAllen, TX. 76501-1665 

5121662-4547 

200 Main Plaza, Suite 400 

San Antonio, TX. 76205-2797 

5121225~4191 

An Equal Opportunity/ 

Affirmative Action Employer 

Honorable Bob Bullock 

Comptroller of Public Accounts 

L.B.J. State Office Building 

Austin, Texas 78774 

opinion No. w-498 

I&: Effect of appropriations 

act rider limiting payment of 

plaintiff's attorney fees in 

suits against the Department 

of Corrections 

Dear Mr. Bullock: 

You have requested our opinion regarding the effect of an 

appropriations act rider limiting payment of plaintiff's attorney fees 

in suits against the Department of Corrections. House Bill No. 9, 

enacted in the second called session of the Sixty-seventh Legislature, 

Acts 1981, 67th Leg., 2d C.S., ch. 2, at 8, provides appropriations 

for various penal, adult correctional and criminal justice purposes. 

The statute provides, in pertinent part: 

AN ACT 

relating to appropriations for the support of 

various departments of state government for penal, 

adult correctional, and criminal justice purposes 

and for the conduct of elections and to 

appropriations for certain legal fees and court 

cost and expenses. 

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE 

OF TEXAS: 

SECTION 1. In addition to sums previously 

appropriated, the following sums are appropriated 

from the general revenue fund to the Texas 

Department of Corrections for the period ending 

August 31, 1983: 

1. a. Speedup of current projects, adapt 

permanent buildings for inmate housing, 

and cunstruction of additional 

units/beds $39,710,000 

p. 1784 
Honorable Bob Bullock - Page 2 0.w498) 

b. Three employee dorms 2.490.000 

2. Security and staff excluding fringe 

benefits normally paid from other funds 

12.407.445 

3. Transportation of inmates from jails 

677,146 

4. Utilities, operating, and equipment costs 

for units on line prior to February, 

1983 2,900,000 

Total $5a,ia4,591 

Less 

Current available funds 7,095,841 

Item j -- appropriations -- Site acquisition, 

Architectural Development and Construction 

TOTAL $51,088,750 

It is the legislature's intent that none of the 

funds appropriated by Item 1 above shall be used 

to begin projects in such a way as would 

necessitate a request for an emergency 

appropriation from the 68th Legislature for the 

purpose of completing said projects. 

. . . . 

SECTION 5. No state funds shall be expended in 

excess of $10,000 for plaintiff's attorney's or 

attorneys' fees, court costs, or other plaintiff's 

expenses in any one suit brought against the Texas 

Department of Corrections or any employee thereof 

unless the expenditure of said funds is 

specifically authorized by an appropriations act 

of the legislature which specifically identifies 

the plaintiff's attorney or attorneys and the suit 

or suits brought against the State of Texas or any 

board or agency thereof. 

You first ask whether section 5 of House Bill No. 9 constitutes 

an invalid attempt to amend general law by an appropriations act 

rider. 

p. 1785 
Honorable Bob Bullock - Page 3 (Mw-498) 

Article III, section 35 of the Texas Constitution has long been 

construed to prohibit the enactment of general legislation within an 

appropriations act. See Moore V. Sheppard, 192 S.W.2d 559, 561 (Tex. 

1946); Attorney General Opinion NW-389 (1981). A rider to an 

appropriations bill is valid, however, if its only effect is to 

"detail, limit or restrict the use of the funds therein appropriated." 

Attorney General Opinions V-1253; V-1254 (1951). See also, Attorney 

General Opinions MW-51 (1979); M-1199 (1972). In our opinion, it is 

clear that section 5 merely imposes a limitation on the expenditure of 

appropriated funds. 

In Attorney General Opinion V-1253 (1951). the Attorney General 

held that a rider providing that "no motor-propelled passenger vehicle 

may be purchased with any of the funds appropriated in this article" 

was "a mere limitation and restriction upon the use of the money 

appropriated by House Bill No. 426." Likewise, section 5 of House 

Bill 9 merely places a limit of $10,000 on certain kinds of 

expenditures. So long as that is its only effect, it is not violative 

of article III, section 35. 

You also ask whether section 5 applies only to the appropriations 

made in House Bill No. 9 or whether it also imposes its restriction on 

the general appropriations act previously enacted by the Sixty-seventh 

Legislature, House Bill No. 656, Acts 1981, 67th Leg. ch. 875, at 

3333. The opinions which have construed article III, section 35 have 

reneatedlv sanctioned riders which detail. limit or restrict funds 

"therein appropriated." (Emphasis added). Attorney General Opinions 

V-1253; V-1254 (1951). See Conley v. Daughters of the Republic, 156 

S.W. 197 (Tex. 1913). House Bill No. 9 was enacted in a called 

session of the legislature. It does not purport to amend the general 

appropriations bill enacted in the regular session, nor does it make 

any reference thereto, except to state, "in addition to sums 

previously appropriated." It constitutes legislation entirely 

separate and apart from the earlier enactment. Since, in our opinion, 

a rider may restrict the expenditure of only those funds appropriated 

by the legislation containing the rider, we conclude that section 5 is 

not applicable to House Bill No. 656, enacted in the regular session 

of the Sixty-seventh Legislature. 

You have not inquired about, and we need not address any 

potential conflict between section 5 and federal legislation. But see 

42 U.S.C. §1988. 

SUMMARY 

Section 5 of House Bill No. 9, Acts 1981, 

Sixty-seventh Legislature, 2d C.S., chapter 2, at 

8, is not an invalid attempt to amend general law 

p. 1786 
Honorable Bob Bullock - Page 4 mw-498) 

by an appropriations act rider. It applies only 

to those appropriations made in House Bill No. 9. 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. 

First Assistant Attorney General 

RICHARD E. GRAY III 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Rick Gilpin 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTRE 

Susan L. Garrison, Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Rick Gilpin 

Patricia Hinojosa 

Richard Meyer 

Jim Moellinger 

Bruce Youngblood 

p. 1787