The Attorney General of Texas 

Ikty 14. 1985 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General 

Supreme Court Bullding 

P. 0. Box 1254a 

Aurlin.Tx. 18711-2548 

51214752cm 

Tolox 010/87C1367 

Tdeco9ler 512l47502S6 

714 Jackson. Suite 700 

Dallas. TX. 752024SOe 

2w742aw4 

4824 Albam Ave.. Suite 180 

El Paso. TX. 799052793 

915633-34s4 

1001 Texas. SuiW 700 

Houslon, TX. 77002.3111 

713223688K 

9W Broadway. Suite 312 

Lubbock, TX. 79401-3479 

K&747-5238 

43W N. Tenth. SuiCe B 

McAllen. TX. 78501.1886 

512N2-4547 

200 Main Plaza, Suits 4OQ 

San Antonio, TX. 782052797 

512/225-4191 

Honorable Henry WaLe 

Criminal District Attorney 

Dallas County Servj.c.es Building 

Condemnation Sectic,m, 

Dallas, Texas. 751,Cs2 

Dear Mr. Wade: 

Opinion No. m-318 

He: Disposition of appeals from 

from justice of the peace courts 

under article 1970-31.2. V.T.C.S. 

You inform us that a problem is presented In the construction of 

section 2, of article 1970-31.2, V.T.C.S.. as to vhat procedure the 

county clerk is to employ in filing cases appealed from the justice of 

the peace courts to the several county courts at law. You also inform 

us that the Dallar, County Clerk is presently filing these appealed 

cases "as they come! in" rather than "in rotation." 

ask: 

In that regard you 

[Wlhethex section 2 of article 1970-31.2, 

V.T.C.S.,, requires the county clerks to set vp a 

special procedure to process and file 'appealed 

cases' 4IEi a separate category of cases (like 

eminent domain proceedings), or vhether the county 

clerk nu;y treat 'appealed cases' in the same 

manner all the case filed under section 31 

We conclude that article 1970-31.2, section 2. V.T.C.S.. does not 

require the Dallas County Clerk to establish a separate procedure. We 

believe that the countv clerk Is required to treat these appealed 

cases in the same winner as other 

section 3, V.T.C.S. 

caaea filed under article 1976-31.2. 

Article 1970-:Il..2. section 2 provides in part: 

Sec. il. All civil cases appealed from the 

several jwtlce courts of Dallas County shall be 

filed by the county clerk in the several count1 

courts o? Dallas County at law consecutively as 

the appe,;Led cases are received by the clerk from 

the se&al justices of the peace in the 

county. , . . (Emphasis added). 

It is our dc,ty in construing statutes to give effect to the 

legislative intent and purpose. Patterson v. City of Dallas, 355 

p. 1454 
Ronorable Renry Wade - Pnge 2 (JX-318) 

S.W.Zd 838 (Tex. Civ. APP. - Dallas 1962, writ ref’d n.r.e.); 53 Tex. 

Jur. 2d Statutes 5125 (1964). In addition, we are only at liberty to 

turn to other aids of constmction when the true intent of the statute 

may not be ascertained on its face. See Trinity Independent School 

District v. Walker County, 287 S.W.Zd 7y(Tex. Civ. App. - Galveston 

1956, no writ). It is clear that article 1970-31.2, section 2. 

V.T.C.S., is mandatory bec6llse it presents circumstances by which a 

public officer shall perfo,no his statutory duty. See State v. Pox. 

133 S.W.2d 987 (Tex. Clv. App. - Austin 1939, writ ref’d); Sutherland, 

Statutory Construction, V.;:P., 157.14 (4th ed. 1984). Therefore, the 

county clerk Is required to file the appealed cases in the manner 

declared in article 1970-3L.2, section 2. V.T.C.S. The ambiguity in 

the statute arises when riection 2 is compared with’ section 3 of 

article 1970-31.2, V.T.C.S. 

Section 2, as quoted above, uses the term "consecutively" to 

describe the method by whlt,h, the county clerk is to file the appealed 

cases in the several county courts at law. V.T.C.S. art. 1970-31.2. 

12. In contrast, section 3. which contains a provision relating to 

the filing of cases lo general, provides that "each case so filed 

shall be filed in rotation in each of the county courts of Dallas 

County at law. . . .I’ V.‘I’.C.S. art. 1970-31.2, 13. Thus, when the 

legislature used the term “consecutively” in section 2. and the term 

"in rotation" in section 3. it arguably intended to prescribe two 

methods by which the county clerk is to file cases in county court. 

We believe, however, that the dominant intent and .purpose of the 

legislature in enacting article 1970-31.2 was to ensure (whell court 

number 5 was created) that: each of the five county courts at law be 

assigned an equal number of cases filed with the county clerk. 

Section 3 also provida!s for the transfer of “any” case pending in 

the docket of the five count:y courts at law. V.T.C.S. art. 1970-31.2. 

13. Those cases appealed from the justices of the peace may be 

included in this transfer along with all cases properly within the 

jurisdiction of the courts; and pending on the docket at the time of 

the transfer. See generaIll, Attorney General Opinion JM-237 (1984) 

(discussion of the jurisdiction of the courts at law in Dallas 

county). The legislature '~8s made an exception in the case where the 

judge of any one of the: county courts has granted a writ of 

certiorari. See V.T.C.S. art. 1970-31.2, $§2, 3. To conclude that 

the legislaturedid not intend to provide for the equalization of the 

dockets would render thie portion of section 3 useless. Thus, we 

construe the filing requi~rement in section 2 to provide for the 

equalization in the dockeMng of appealed cases filed in the several 

county Courts at law from the justices of the peace. 

As indicated above, the use of the word "consecutively" in 

section 2 and the phrase "in rotation" in section 3 describe the 

manner by which cases are co be filed in the county court. When the 

legislative purpose is ascertained. the significance of words used may 

p. 1455 
Honorable llenry Wade - Pogf: 3 (Jn-318) 

be restricted or enlarged in order to effectuate the 1egisLative 

purpose and meaning. See West Texas Utilities Co. v. City of Mason, 

-- 

229 S.W.2d 404 (Tex. Civ. Pgp. - Austin). aff’d, 237 S.W.2d 273 (Tex. 

1951). The word “consecutively” was firstused by the leaislature in 

1963 to describe the manuer in.which cases appealed from the justice’s 

courts to the county courl:s at law in Dallas county should be filed. 

See V.T.C.S. art. 

i7T.c.s.. 

197o-:I:L. 1’ 12. Article 1970-31.1, section 2, 

provided in part: 

[A]11 civil cases appealed froo the several 

Justice Courts 80:f Dallas County shall be by the 

County Clerk filed in the several County Courts of 

Dallas County at Law coosecutivelo as said 

appealed cases are received. . . . (Emphasis 

added). 

This language impliedly repealed the language used by the legislature 

in article 1970-16. Article 1970-16. V.T.C.S., was enacted in 1917 

and used the term “alterna~tively” rather than “consecutively” because 

only two county courts at law existed at that time in Dallas County. 

Accordingly, we believe ttat when the legislature created court number 

5, the term “consecutively” was used because it was a more appropriate 

term than ‘alternatively” when describing how cases are to be filed in 

five courts rather than tvo courts. 

“Consecutively” is i.efined by Black’s Law Dictiocary (5th ed. 

1979) a$ “Successive, succeeding one another in regular order.” The 

tern “rotate” is defined Fn Webster’s dictionary as “to perform an 

act. function, or operatj,cn in turn [or] to pass or clternate in a 

series.” Webster’s h’intt, New Colle8iate Dictionary (9th ed. 19813. 

If we construe the languz;;e of section 2 as you suggest, the county 

clerk would be permitted to reasonably file cases in a particular 

county court at law so long as each case received was filed one after 

the other in any one of the courts. We believe that this construction 

is not inconsistent with the legisl.ative intent to maintain equal 

dockets in all courts. 

Section 2 should be read together with section 3 in order to give 

effect to the legislative intact. Secticn 3 further provides: 

sec. 3. The County Court of Dallas County at 

Law No. 5 shal:. be known as the ‘E’ Court. The 

county clerk shall number consecutively all casts 

filed in the county courts of Dallas County at law 

affixing immediately tollowicc the number of all 

cases the letter A, B. C. D. cr E, according to 

which county court of Dallas Count: at law the 

case is assigned. and each case SC filed shall be 

filed in rot,-.ci~ in each of the count: courts of 

Dallas County :,t - law wlch the letter designation 

-- 

p. 1456 
Honorable Henry Wedc - Pagal 4 (X+318) 

being used to denote the court in which the CJSC 

is filad. . . . I:Emphasis added). 

V.T.C.S. art, 1970-31.2, I:)* This provision require8 the county clerk 

to perform two mandatory duties, First, the county clerk is to number 

“all” cases filed. and tL: provision also requires the clerk to file 

those numbered cases “in rotation.” Section 3, does not exclude from 

these two requirements cases filed with the county clerk which have 

been appealed from the justices of the peace. Accordingly, we 

conclude that the requiremmt of section 2 is limited by section 3 and 

that the county clerk is mquired to file all the cases appealed from 

the justices of the peace consecutively, along with the other cases 

filed, and to assign each case to the several,county courts at law in 

rotation. along with the ,,ther cases filed. The only cases excepted 

from this filing requirement are eminent domain cases. See Property 

Code 521.013(d) (clerk is to assign an equal number of emxnt domain 

cases “in rotation”). 

SUMMARY 

Article 1970-:31.2. section 2, V.T.C.S.. does 

not require the Dallas County Clerk to establish a 

separate procedt.re to file appealed cases from the 

justices of tte peace court. The county clerk is 

required to trer.t these appealed cases in the same 

manner as other cases filed under article 

197.0-31.2, sectj.on 3, Y.T.C.S. 

Very truly you 

I 

, 

u-1 b 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

TOM GREEN 

First Assistant Attorney General 

DAVID R. RICURDS 

Executive Assistant Attorxy General 

RO6ERT GRAY 

Special Assistant htcorney General 

RICK GILPIN 

Chaimnn, Opinion Comicce? 

Prepared by Tony Guillory 

Assistant Attorney General 

p. 1457 
Hmorable Hcnr; Wade - Page 5 (X3-318) 

APPROVED: 

OPINIOA COMNITTEE 

Rick Gilpin. Chairman 

Jon Bible 

Colin Cerl 

Susan Garrison 

'Ion)- Guillory 

Jim Hoellinger 

Jennifer Riggs 

Nancy Sutton 

p. 1458