Hon. 0. P. lookhart, ChaiZmrm 

Board of Insuranoo h8ml88loner8 

Au4tla, Teu8 

Dear Sirs oplmlom R4. Q-3910 

Roe Stat4 or uqr,other lrtoroetmd 

pai-@- aould mgge8t to oourt 

that a raooimr 'Ia8 r4mw4d. 

Your request for an opinion of thlr dsprtmmt ir an f4llom: 

'On Haroh 30, 1938, th4 ,Utate of T4za8,, 'aotlmg w amd through it8 ~duly 4140~ 

t4d, qurllfisd amd aotlng Attamoy Gemoral, Ullll8m HoCrar, at th8 ,speolal 

in8%6YlO4 'ia Z-4QU88,* Of th4'k0ar&Of bWamo4 ,+6.d861O,I4~6 1 flJ4d oPu.8 ,&. 

59,771 in &,126th M8trlot'Court of lbavi8 COunty. The p4tlt&om alleged that 

the d4f4mdamt,Rapnblio Umderwrit4r4, an lmt8r-iaburamw aohango, wa8,in8olren+, and r8qu48t4d th4 l pp4lmtm4mt,4f a r404lvir. 

*On th8 ,4sa4 day, a# order'wu 4nt4r4d app4imtlmg Curt18 I. Hill a8 4qar%4 

Beo~lver amd J&m Atkimsom a8 Attormrg far th8 Reoeiyw. 

“On ‘baocmbsr 17, 1938, a final judgp4n! -6 4akr4d, direotimg th4 lZ4o4lver 

and Attormsg th4WbOfor8 app4lmMd to liquidate th4 ,afhir8 of th4 Pint. 

"On Maroh 24, 1941, th4 R444i~4r fil4d hi8 SUppkK&al rqort,‘qa fh8 affair8 

of Oh4 R4oelvur8hip 8h4Wim& that virtually all a88ot8 had ?~44n +&uobd to 

oash, and that their va4 tha Q ham&for dlstribptlom the 4ua &f #23,426.66. 

It further 4h4w8d.that umpald prlwl~ olainu ‘q4ubhbd to abut: #6,ooO.00, 

Pnd that all&d geasml olaimm amourkd t4 #176,150&O. 

"01 Maroh 26, 1941,'am ord8rra8 8mtorWumd8r th8 R4481?4r'8 appIicbio8 

filed %h4 8M dw gramtimg him authority t0 king am a8808P8Dt 8Ui 6g6im8‘Y 

the maborl%4r8 of th4 defbriot flea la ord@r to raise 8uffioi4mt fumd4 to &my 

th4 approved olairrm, with 4xp4n848 whlohw4reto inoludo atbrm~18 fee8 of 

26% and aeawmWmb~8 fee8 4f 15% of th4 grO88 reow4ny. 6uoh a ruit wa8 

fil4d ly th8 Bewfv4r 48 July 30, 1941, bbimg BO . 86,362 om the'DoOk8t of th4 

98th M8W'lct Cerrrf oi ‘hWd.8 COUUtye 

“Arfele 60684, VWmom'8 R.C.S., anaot4d w th4 46th Ingi8latiro In 1959~ provld4s a n4w pro48dur4 for llquldatiom8 of th4 84I"t her8 OOSIO8X'm4de Iji8+h4 

'belIsP of the wrlt4r that th4 fllimg of th4 abam nwmtlon8d emu64 Ro. 93,369 

omsjitute8 in foot a r4-opsmimg of a olrtu~~y'olO84d r4ooiv4nhlp. H4 18 

further of ths opinion that 8UOh addltiomal admlnl+r&lo8 ef the affair8 of 

thla rsodv4rshlp a8 may bs n8488sup cam be moro 4oOmdoally oomduotod, 4md 

with grat4r bnefitto all oomoerm4d, if th4y are handled und4rth8 authority 

of Ptiole 60680. 
Hon. 0. P. Lookhart, p4g4 2 (0.6910) 

*Your opinion is, therefore, r88peatfUly requ48tsd a8 follorrc 

"1. Is there legal authority for the interv4mtlon of the Stat8 lnthi8 matt4r, 

r4questingthat furth4r l chainistratlor of th4affairs of th4 reoslsership of th8 

Rspublio &dsrwrlt8r8 38 oollduotsd under the prwislons of Artlols 606808 

“2. Ip 40, what ar4 th4 duties Plrd powers of the Board of In8uraao4 Comlssion4r8 In lastltutiag such rotion?" 

Ilb held In our Oplmion No. O-6696 that Artiol4 60680 of th4 Rwl84d civil 

Statutes of TQxas,whioh appremtly requires the oourt to appoint the statutory 

liquidator of the Board cb Imt%rPmoO Comission4rs as r404iver for lmsolv4~ lnNranw oom&~3ie8, oould not In any w4mt be ratrosp8otlvs SO a4 to r4qulreth4 

court to rem8 rsoelvers appointed prior to the effeotlve date of suoh statute 

aad appoilrths 8tatutory liquidator a8 receiver to complete the litigation. lh 

further held that duoh shatut8 vas mersly directory, and that to coastrueti 8-4 

as maadatorg uponthe oourt to app4iat the 8tatutoz-y llatidator a8 reoeivsr muld 

r4ndsr the spme unoonstlkdiomal. We 844 no OOoaSioX to ohage or modify suoh 

opinion. 

Rth this explanation of our prior opinion, w4 p888 to a oonaideratlon of 

your first question. The Stat4 of Texas is sow plaintiff la the Oa88 under aonsideration, th4 88184 b8iSg styl4dr "The Stat4 of Tams T. Republlo ~d4nn%ten, 

C8u84 &.~~591771, ln the 126th Dlstriot Court," ati hen04 no lntervsntion, as that 

t4rm is known in law, is n40888aZ'y. The Bktcif'Tera8, as vmlla 8 say other lnterested party, could, by proper motion, suggest to the oourt th4t the pr484nt 

reoeiver be rearoved and the statutory liquidator sub8tltuted thsr4for. 6uoh motion, of o-84, must lm 8upporOed by 8ti oompeteat wideno4 as to the necessity 

and ths desirablli~ of the ohang4. 'Th4 judgd of the court, having the Fer 8nd 

authority to seleot and appoint r4oeiv4r8, would, If the svidenos justlfl4d and 

required suoh action, r-4 the pr4sent reaalver. If suohwere done, th4 oourt 

could thea appoint ths statutory liquidator or am other person he desires. Cloarly, under our abarrs mentioned opinion, he would not be r4quired to appoint your 

liquidator. 

YOU sulmit no faots with ~rour Inquiry which would justi* thio depsetmezrt la 

filing a motion to hav-4 th4 prsssat receiwr raslwsd and ths statutory liquidator 

appointed. If you ar4 la posr48slon of faots which, In your opinion, should be made 

kaown to the aourt, ws ask tb8t you kindly advise In order that ws mlghtdst4wias 

the advisability of flllag such motioa. 

U:GO:e&‘w 

APPROVED SEP 19, 1941 

I*/ Grover 84llers 

FIRST ASSISTANT 

ATTORNEY mlmRAL 

Yours veryt-uly 

ATTOHliEY GEREXU OFTEXAS 

% /*/ Lloyd f-=‘~~ 

Approved: Opinion Colmnittee 

By B.W.B. Chalnmn