OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Hanomble cou@ty P.T. chumh@m 

Auditor 

uavarro couaty 

CorBioana, zemr 

Dear sir1 

678 

requert a8 

been reoo1v.d and 

we quot* frou youlthl8 ratter. 

be liable for hia hoe 

r bl5lr or voul.4 he ba 

orpital and do&or bill. 

as axpen of OfftOe urd 

(I yealr'm eamlngcl?" 

51, Artlole 3, of our Fsate Conrtltlltion, 

"The L&datum 8Mll brre no pcmr to 

mke any grant 0~ autharlr~ the mddng of w 

grant of publio money to w UdlvtduaX, ameciatlon of iadlvhItslr, musd$ipal. Of other 

oorporationa lrhat8oever...~' 
HOnorable E.P. Cumla@am, Page 2 

deolarest 

seotlon 52, ArtI 3 0f bur atate comtitutim, 

"The Lsglslature shall have a0 p0ver to 

authorlxe any oouuty, olty, ton, or other politisal oorporatlon or subdlvlslan of ths State to 

lend its or&It or to grant pub110 money or thing 

of Value in aid of, or to any lndlvidul, assoolatlon or oorporation vhatsoever, 

dsolaresr 

Seation 53, Artlole 3 of ollp State Donstitutlon, 

"The4 Lsgfslature shall ham n0 povor to 

grant, or to l uthimiss urg oountr or munIalpal 

authority to grant, sny sxtra oompensatlon, is8 

or allovanoe to a publla oifioer, agsnt, servant 

or oontraotor, after 81~rviee has been rsndered, 

or a mntraot baa basn ontemd into. and psrfione 

l d In vhole or In part; nor pay nor authorlss ths 

paymant of, any alala cawted agalnat any OOUILQ 

or munlolpality of the State, uadar any agresmsnt 

or 00ntra6t, mad8 without authority of lav." 

It 18 fundamsatal lav that the oom518slowrs1 00urt 

18 a oourt of limitsd PclsdIotlon and ha8 only such pavers 

as are oonferrsd upon I t by ths Conititution and rtatutes of 

this at&e. 

a?Jf (28) 479. 

Hovard, et WC vs. Ebad8rson Oounty, et al, 116 

Opinion Ho. O-779 of this depwtaent holds that 

neither the oountynorthe ~~adprsoinats of ths oountyhavs 

authority to oarry smploysr*s liability lnsuranoe for the 

plloteotlon of road workmen of the 00unty. 

OplnIon lo. o-2136 of this depaftment Esals vith 

the question of vhether or not tlrr oorai8iloners' oourt has 

Y-i!! 

t 

ik81~t. _ death 0r ~11 eqployssl of the 00untJ in a sollisIon 

and authority to pay a @WS fOol. Wss r8sultM 

vhile on his way to work for the c~uety. Ths OplnIc~~ holds 

that the ooml88ioners* aourt mnnot I.ogally pay the 0laIm. 

9pIni0n Ho. 04%~ of this departrsnt holds that 

the comals810nerst Oourt xsay not legally expend Oounty funds 

E 
Honorable E.Y. &muiaPhrl, h8s 3 

for the hospitalltation of a Deputy %herlff shot vhlle in 

line of duty. 

Opinion &I. O-2473 of tN8 dspartmnt holds that 

the oounty is not llable Por psrsonal in&rise of raad hands 

woelved while employed by the oounty. 

Ws bre snalosing hsrevZth oapies of the 6bote mantloned op3nlons for your oonvsulsnee. 

Artlols 3899(r). Vernon*8 Annotated Clvll Statute8 

of Te%%s, deals with the expense aooouats of fee offlearn. 

The wee of %tate vs. Carnss, 106 %Il (26) 397, in aonstroing 

said artiols as ammdsd in 1933, held that ths sxpsnsss, otbm 

than those expenditurss la oomestion with automb~les, vhish 

sn officer is authoMsed to olaim as deduotlons, am limited 

to statlomlry, st%mps, t010phoas, Clwsllllg sxpsnsss, and 

other al&law nsoweary expunswr the rukoi ejusdsa generis 

bslng applied to qualify ths gonsral kan8ua88 by ths spsolally 

emusrated itasa snd to restriot its ammIng to expcmsss oi 

the saw kind and oharaoter. 

In vlev of the foregoIng authoPltiw you ar8 Pwpwtfully advissd that It is ths apinion of this dspaHmsatr 

1. The county la not Uabls for rush hospital~xatloa 

and dootor bills and ths aamsissious?s~ oaurt is vlUmut 

authority to expend oounty funds for the pa-t of saw. 

2. Buoh hespital and doolmr bills mumat bs le&ly 

oo~l&red as "expe~w of offies" md oant~~t be legally dsduoted as such by ths saustablo. 

WJFlAW APPROVEDDEC 11, 1940 

HNcLoatrmr 

. 

ATTORNEY GiCNERAL 03' TEXAS