The Attorney General of Texas 

November 10, 1980 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General 

Honorable William C. Wright 

Orange County Attorney 

County Courthouse 

Orange, Texas 77630 

Opinion No. MW-268 

Re: Whether a county court-atlaw judge may adopt a sick leave 

policy for his employees different 

from the policy adopted by the 

commissioners court 

Dear Mr. Wright: 

You have requested our opinion as to whether the judge of the county 

court-at-law of Orange County may adopt a sick leave policy for his 

employees different from the policy adopted by the commissioners court. 

Your particular inquiry relates to the court coordinator of the county courtat-law. 

The county court-at-law of Orange County was created by article 

1970-349, V.T.C.S. Section 4(a) thereof provides: 

The County Attorney, County Clerk, and Sheriff of 

Orange County, Texas, shall serve as County 

Attorney, Clerk, and Sheriff, respectively, of the 

County Court at Law of Orange County. The 

Commissioners Court of Orange County may employ 

as many additional assistant county attorneys, deputy 

sheriffs and clerks as are necessary to serve the 

Court created by this Act. Those serving shall 

perform the duties, and are entitled to the compensation, fees, and allowances, prescribed by law for their 

respective offices in Orange County. 

The present policy of the Orange County Commissioners Court allows each 

county employee up to 60 days sick leave. You contend that this policy is 

superseded by article 3902, V.T.C.S., which provides, in pertinent part: 

Whenever any district, county or precinct officer 

shall require the services of deputies, assistants or 

clerks in the performance of his duties he shall apply 

p. 852 
Honorable William C. Wright - Page Two (MN-268) 

to the County Commissioners’ Court of his county for authority 

to appoint such deputies, assistants or clerks, stating by sworn 

application the number needed, the position to be filled and the 

amount to be paid. Said application shall be accompanied by a 

statement showing the probable receipts from fees, 

commissions and compensation to be collected by said office 

during the fiscal year and the probable disbursements which 

shall include all salaries and expenses of said office; and said 

court shall make its order authorizing the appointment of such 

deputies, assistants and clerks and fix the compensation to be 

paid them within the limitations herein prescribed and 

determine the number to be appointed as in the discretion of 

said court may be proper; provided that in TW) case shall the 

Commissioners’ Court or any member thereof attempt to 

influence the appointment of any person as deputy, assistant or 

clerk in any office. Upon the entry of such order the officers 

applying for such assistants, deputies or clerks shall be 

authorized to appoint them; provided that said compensation 

shall not exceed the maximum amount hereinafter set out. The 

compensation which may be allowed to the deputies, assistants 

or clerks above named for their services shall be a reasonable 

one, not to exceed the following amounts: 

Even if article 3902 permits the judge to fix the amount of sick leave which his 

court coordinator may accrue, article 3912k, V.T.C.S., enacted in 1971, repealed every 

prior law to the extent that it prescribed “the compensation, office expense, travel 

expense, or any other allowance for any official or employee.” Article 3912k, section 

8. Attorney General Opinion MW-136 (1980). That statute makes it the duty of the 

commissioners court to: 

fix the amount of compensation, office expense, travel expense, 

and all other allowances for county and precinct officials and 

employees who are paid wholly from county funds, but in no 

event shall such salaries be set lower than they exist at the 

effective date of this Act. 

Section 1. It is clear that sick leave policy for all county employees covered by article 

3912k is to be set by the commissioners court. Adoption of a sick leave policy for 

county employees by the commissioners court would not improperly interfere with the 

judge’s prerogative of selecting his court coordinator. See Renfro v. Shropshire, 566 

S.W. 2d 688, 691-92 (Tex. Civ. App. - Eastlsnd 1978, wr=ePd n.r.e.). Thus, it is our 

opinion that the judge of the county court-at-law of Orange County may not adopt a 

sick leave policy for his employees which differs from the policy adopted by the 

commissioners court. 

p. 553 
Honorable William C. Wright - Page Three (NW-2683 

SUMMARY 

The judge of the county court-at-law of Orange County may 

not adopt a sick leave policy for his employees which differs 

from the policy adopted by the commissioners court. 

MARK WHITE 

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 COMMlTTEE 

Susan L. Garrison, Acting Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Walter Davis 

Rick Gilpin 

Bruce Youngblood 

p. 854