AUSTIN ~.TExAs 

PRICE DANIEL 

ATTORNEY GENERAL January 28, 1949 

Hon. F. B. Caudle 

County Attorney 

Frenklin County 

Mount Vernon, Texas 

Opinion 180, V-761. 

Re: The period of an appointment to fill a vacencg in 

the office of Dlstpict 

Clerk; same having been 

made after the last general election and before the 

next tern to which the deceased had been elected. 

Dear Sir: 

Reference is made to goup recent request 

which reads in substance as follows: 

“The District ~Clerk of Franklin County, 

who was reelected at the November Election, 

1948, died thereafter on the 15th. of Hovembep, 198~ The two District Judges. 0 0 

made an appointment as provided by law; an6 

the appointee accepted and qualifier%. 

“Does the appointment filling the vacancy of the District Clerk8s Office pun to the 

next Genepal Election, 1950; op since the 

vacancy and appointment occuPed between the 

General EIection anti the following Jan. 1, is 

it necessary that there be an appointment OP 

reappointment as of Jan. 1, 1949. In other 

words when does the appointment expFPe? 

Art. XVI, Sec. 27 of the State Constitution 

proviaes aa follows: 

“In all elections to fill vacancies of 

office in this State, it”shall be to fill 

the unexpired term only, 

Art. 1895, V. C. S., provides as follows". 
Hon. F. B. Caudle, page 2 (V-761) 

%he~ve~ a vrcaney oceura tn the office of district clerk, It shall be filled 

by thii district judge of such c6unty; and 

such appointee shall give bond and qualify 

and may hold his officd until the next general election. Where a vacsney occurs in 

a count.. having two or more district courts, 

the vacency shall be filled by the judges 

of such courts; and if they fall’ to agree, 

the Governor, upon the certificate of suoh 

judges, shall opde; a special election to 

fill such vacancy. 

We ham been unable to f1nd.a case where the 

courts have passed upon this specific qriestion. However, in the case of Dobklns v, Reece, 17 S,U. (26) 81 

(Writ of &TOP Refurod), in construing slmlla~ statutory and constitutional ppovisionr we find the followingn 

“This appeal involves a eonteat ovep the 

office of sheriff of Cpoke aounty. Jake 

Wright was the duly lectrd and sating sheriff of Cooke oounty 

’ 

OP the ten br&.inln 

Januspy ,l, 1927, and indlng January 1, ,19 s 9. 

mart, 1929 ~’ 

He was du y nominatscl duriag ‘the Jgly phi- 

, and wa.8 reelected at the-succeeding general eiection, lovembor 6, 1928. On 

Deceibrr 12, 1928, he died, without having 

qualified under his new term, On December 

14, 1928;tho county oommirr~onr~s~ coin% 

elected or appbinted Jonathaii Dobkins aa 

sherl;ff , who bappenod to ba at the time of 

his appointment a member of the oommlssionei9 9 couiit, but, as-‘he testified; did not 

participate iii the appointment, and was not 

present thereat, 

” 

e * e 

‘Dibkinr filed hll bond on the 14th of 

December, ~1928, and qualified and entaped 

upon the. dutie,s of his offior. It so happen.6 that the po~~onnol of the cotissionem 9 court changed on JmuaPy 1, 1929, and 

two of the former members retirbd, and two 

new nembem qualified. On Janiiapy 2, 1929, 

the matter~~of the election OP appointment of 

a shoplff again wa8 conaldored by the ooxas.Lsaloners 1 cow?t, and Ate Weeee warn elected, 

0 0 e 
Hon. F. B. Caudle, page 3 (V-761) 

“The two questions which we think me 

important ,and involved in this case aPe8 (1) 

Was the original appointment by the commissioners 1 court of Dobkins merely for the unexplped temn ending December 31, 1928, and 

not including the’tepm beginning January 1, 

1929, or, did the appointment extend to the 

two succeeding years, and until December 31, 

1930, or January 1, 19317 

“The Constitution. 1iPllts the term of 

the sheriff to two years. He cannot be 

elected for two terms at the same election, 

a fortiorl, h6 cannot be appointed fop two 

terms, OF a pa& of one term and whole of 

the succeeding term at one end the same 

time. when the duration OF term of an office la a question of doubt OF uncertainty, 

the interpretation should be followed which 

limits such office to the shortest term. 

Wright v. Adams, 45 Tex. 134, Other authoritles might be cited, but we believe 

in the discussion heretofore sufficient has 

been said to show that in our opinion the 

appellantOa term under his appointment in 

December, 1928, had expired at the time the 

election was had by the eommiasionePsB 

court on Januuy 2, 1929, If such view be 

correct, then it follows that a vacancy 

existed, for the new term of two yeapa foP 

which the deceased, JakG Wright, had been 

elected by the voters of Cooke couI1tr, -4 

that the commissioners0 cauPt had authorsity to fill such vacancy, 

In view of the foregoing it IS oup Opinion 

that~~the appointment of the District Clerk expires on 

Januaxy 1, 199. 

However, Art. XVI, Sec. 17, provides that” 

!A11 officers within this State shall 

continue to perform the duties of their offices untii their successors shall be duly 

qualified. 
Hono F. B. Caudls, page 4 (v-761) 

Art. 18, v. Co S., pPovl&es in part as Sollowsn 

'Each officer, whether elected OP appointed under the laws of this State, and 

each Commissioner, or member of any board 

or commission created by the laws of this 

State, shall hold his office for the term 

pxWride& by law and until his successor ii 

elected or appointed and quallfiesp 0 0 0 

It is apparent from the Sopegoing that the 

present District Clerk shall continue to sot until his 

successor is appointed and qualifies, 

Where the Distriot Clerk of Fpanklih 

County was reelected to succeed himself at 

the Bovember election 1948, died on the 

15th of Bovember, 1948, and the District 

Judges made an appointment to Sill the vacancy a6 provided by law, said appointment 

expired on the first day of January, 1949, 

Apta XVI, Sec. 27 of the State Const,? Apt, 

(2dy,8y1 C, S.8 Dobkins ve Reece, 17 So W, 

vwy truly youPs, 

ATTORBEY GgagRALOF TEXAS 

BA:bh Assistant