September 17, 1969 

Dr. J. W. Edgar 

Commissioner of Education 

Texas Education Agency 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Dear Dr. Edgar: 

Opinion No. M-475 

Re: Questions concerning 

the applicability of 

the Tort Claims Act 

(Acts 61st Leg., R.S. 

1969, Ch. 292, p. S74), 

to school districts. 

You have requested the opinion of this office regarding 

certain questions involving the Tort Claims Act, codified as 

Article 6252-19, Vernon's Civil Statutes. These questions are 

paraphrased for convenience as follows: 

1. In Section 19A. applicable to school districts, 

does the term "motor vehicles* include "motor 

driven equipment" other than school busses7 

2. (a) Where under Section 9 a school district purchases liability insurance to cover paid employees 

for torts committed in the scope of their district 

employment, is the employee thereby protected from 

the imposition of further judgment for'damages? 

(b) Where under Section 9 a school district does 

not purchase liability insurance to cover its school 

bus drivers and requires as a condition of employment 

that the bus driver shall purchase liability insurance , may the district pay the premium thereon 

from its local maintenance funds7 

-2367- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, paw 2 (U-475) 

(c) In situations referred to in (a) and (b) 

above, is the bus driver’s bond prescribed in 

Article 2687a also required? 

3. (a) May the premium for liability insurance 

legally be paid out of the transportation fund, 

if any, of the school district? Stated another 

way, does the Tort Claims Act contemplate that 

such premiums shall be paid out of local district 

maintenance funds as distinguished from the Diatrict Transportation Fund or County Transportation 

Fund (Article 2922-15, Sec. 2) as the case may be, 

whose limited allocation source is from State 

appropriations? 

(b) Where under Section 2(l) of Article 2922-15, 

the county school board (not the school district) 

maintains and operates a county unit school bus 

system, is such county operating authority.authorised 

to purchase such liability insurance7 If yes, who 

pays the premiums and from what funds? 

In connection with your first question, the following is 

quoted from the Tort Claims Act: 

“Sec. 3. Each unit of government in the state shall 

be liable for money damages for personal injuries or 

death when proximately caused by the negligence or 

wrongful act or omission of any officer or employee 

acting within the scope of his employment or office 

arisinc from the operation or use of a motor-driven 

vehicle and motor-drive equipment, . .." 

"Sec. 19A. The provisions of this Act shall not 

apply to school districts except as to motor vehicles." 

(Emphasis supplied.) 

You have indicated concern over the proper interpretation 

'of the limitation of liability granted to school districts by 

Section 19A, aupra. You indicate that some school districts 

- 2368 - 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 3 (M-475) 

are of. the opinion that liability extends only to school bus 

operations, while others are of the opinion liability extends 

to the operation of loaned or owned driver education cars, 

riding lawnmowers, tractors used in vocational agriculture 

courses, and other motor +iven equipment. 

Section 19A clearly limits the liabi,lity of school districts 

to acts of negligence involving,motor vehicles. For the purpose 

of regulating vehicles in this State the Legislature has made the 

following definitions in Article 6675a-l,.Vernon's Civil Statutes: 

"(a)'Vehicle' means every device in, or by which 

any person or property is, or may be transported or 

drawn upon a public highway, except devices moved only 

by human power or used exclusively upon stationary 

rails or tracks. 

"(b)'Motor vehicle' means every vehicle, as herein 

defined, that is self-propelled." 

In answer to your specific question, you are advised that 

the term "motor vehicles" extends beyond school busses, and 

includes at least all vehicles that may fall within the definition 

given in Article 6675a-1, supra, but does.not include "motor 

driven equifient" unless such equipment constitutes a "vehicle". 

. 

Your question Number 2(a) is restated for clarity: 

Where under Section 9 a school district purchases 

liability insurance to cover paid employees for torts 

committed in the scope of their district employment, is 

the employee thereby protected from the ,impoaition of 

further judgment for damages?" 

In answer thereto, you are advised that it is the view of 

this office that’the presence of liability insurance has no 

baaring upon the matter of the imposition of damages against a 

governmental employee. The only limitation on employees’ 

liability provided by the Tort Claims Act is set forth in Section 

12(a), to-wit* 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 4 (W-475) 

'The judgment or settlement in an action or 

claim under this Act shall constitute a complete 

bar to any action by the claimant, by reason of 

the same subject matter;againat the employee of a 

unit of government whose act or omission gave rise to 

the claim." 

Your question Number 2(b) is restated: 

'Where under Section 9 a school district does not 

purchase liability insurance to cover its school bus 

drivers and requires as a condition of employment that 

the bus driver ahall purchase liability'insurance, may 

the district pay the premium thereon fro_ its local 

maintenance funds?" 

In the event a school district determines that liability 

insurance should be purchased, we would point out that such 

insurance stiould provide coverage in the manner set forth in 

Section 9 of the Tort Claims Act, i.e., "...for such units of 

government, their officers, agents and employees against claims 

brought under the provisions of this Act, . ..* We would also 

observe that a general liability policy, such as would be 

written for an individual, provides coverage for a broader 

liability than ia.impoaed in the Tort Claims Act. We find no 

authority in law-to 'wrmit a achool,district to pay for an 

individual employee's liability insurance premium,under the 

circumstances related. In the absence of such authority, you 

are advised that the district may not pay the insurance 

.premiuma from its local maintenance funds when it does not purchase liability insurance to cover its school bus drivers. 

Your question Number 2(c) is restated: 

"In situations referred to in (a) and (b) above, 

is the bus driver's bond prescribed in Article 26S7a 

also required?" 

Article 2687a, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, is quoted in part 

as follower 

- 2370 - 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, Page 5 (M-475) 

*a . ..The drivers of all school tranaportation 

vehicles shall be required to give bond for such 

amount as the Board of Trustees of the district may 

prescribe, not leas than $2,000.00, payable to the 

district, and conditioned unon the faithful and 

careful diacharce of their duties for the Protection 

of the nupila under their charqe and faithful verformanci of the contract with School Board: . ..'I 

(Emphasis aup~lied.) 

Section 20 of the Tort Claims Act reads as followat 

"All laws or parts of Saw, and all enactments, 

rules and regulations or any and all units of 

gwernment, and all organic laws of such units 

of government, in conflict herewith are hereby 

repealed, annulled and voided, to the extent of 

such conflict." 

In view of the fact that the terms of the bond required by 

Article 2687a, aupra, cwer aifuationa beyond the scope of the 

Tort Claims Act, you are advised that it is the opinion of this 

office that the said Article 2687a is not in conflict with the 

Tort Claims Act and is not repealed thereby. The requirement 

of a bond of not leas than $2.000.00 for school bus drivers 

remains in full force and effect. 

Your question Number 3(a) .ia restated: 

"May the premium for liability insurance legally 

be paid out of the transportation fund, if any, of the 

school district?' Stated another way, does the Tort 

Claims Act contemplate that such premiums shall be paid 

out of local district maintenance funds as distinguiahed 

from the District Transportation Fund or County Tranaportation'Fund (Article 2922-15, Sec. 2) as the case may 

be, whose limited allocation source is from State appropriations?" 

-2371- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 6 (M-475) 

Your question Number 3(b) is restated: 

"Where under Section Z(1) of Article 2922-15, the 

county school board (not'the school district) maintains 

and operates a county unit school bus system, is such 

county operating authority authorized to purchase such 

liability insurance? if yea, who pays the premium and 

frpm what funds?" _ 

In making a reply to these questions, we must first note 

that there is no requirement that liability insurance be purchased under the Tort Claims Act. That statute simply authorizes 

the purchase of such insurance at the discretion of.the governmental unit. The statute is silent as to any method of financing 

insurance premiums. Since such expenditures are authorized, but 

not required, we are of the view that they should be considered 

as general operating expenses of the governmental unit, and 

payable out of any fund available for those purposes. With regard to the District or County Transportation Fund, governed by 

Article 2922-15, Vernon's Civil Statutes, we note that Section 2(b) 

thereof makes a base allowable for the coats of maintenance, operation, salaries, depreciation, etc., for the conduct of a school 

bus system. Since the cost of liability insurance would be part 

of the coat of the operation of such a system, it follows that 

the District or County Transportation Fund,could properly be 

used for the proporfionate share of the total premium that 

represents school bus operation. * 

SUMMARY 

Section 19A of the Tort Claims Act (Article 

6252-19, V.C.S.) limits school district tort 

liability to acts of negligence involving motor 

vehicles. A "motor vehicle" at least includes 

any,vehicle coming within the definition set 

forth in Article 6675a-1, V.C.S. 

The presence of liabilitv insurance has no 

bearing upon the matter of the imposition of damages 

against a governmental employee. In the event of 

- 2372 - 
Dr. J. w. Edgar, page 7 (M-475) 

a damage suit against a governmental agency. the 

judgment or settlement in such suit constitutes 

a complete bar to any recovery against the 

individual employee involved in the incident. 

Section 12(a), Tort Claims Act. 

If a school district purchases liability insurance, the policy should be written in the t:rma 

of the statute. 

The Tort Claims Act does not operate to repeal 

Article 2607a, V.C.S., and the bond required of a 

school bus driver by the said Article 2607a is 

still required. 

If it is determined that.liability insurance 

should be purchased, the premiums therefor may 

properly be paid out of the District or County 

Transportation Fund (Article 2922-15, V.C.S.), as 

an Operating expense of school bus service. 

Yours 9 ery truly, 

General of Texas 

Prepared by Malcolm L. Quick 

Aaaiatant Attorney General 

APPROVED : 

Opinion Committee 

Kerns Taylor, Chairman 

George Kelton, Vice-Chairman 

Jack Sparks 

Alfred Walker 

Earold Kennedy 

Roland Allen 

-E P. GRIFFIN 

Stat f Lsgal Assistant 

-2373- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 8 (M-475) 

IiawTxo~ PHILLIPS 

Executive Assistant 

NOLR WHITE 

First Assistant