AURTIN aa.TWAB April 20, 3953

HOnaFred C. Brigman, Jr. Opinion No. S-31 County Attorney Uvalde County Ret Legality of the county at- .Uvalde, Texas torney accepting private employment to maintain an injunction action adverse to the collection of oertafn taxes by an lndependDear Sir! ent &ohool .dlstrlot e

In substance you have.aeked thie office for its 

### opinion on tihefollowing question:

Maya county attorney represent a prlv&e clfent in a tauft to e&loin an fndepen- r ~~tti;;ho&~dietfict from collection of a

0 There f8 a etriot limitation on the unofficial enzploynent of a oounty 

### attorney fnr&ticle 32 of the Code of CrfmInal Procedure of ‘l!exa~~which protides:



### “Dlstrlct and county attorney6 ahall 

### not byeof counsel adversely to the State in ar\.y 0866~ in any court, nor shall they, after timy cease to 

### be euoh officers, 

### be of course1 efmmely to the State in any oaae 

### in which they have been counsel for the State.” 

### zntbeoarreof ove 

### 351, 40 S.W.2d 20, 26 (1 v. City of Dallas, 120Tex. l), the SupremeCourt said:

“School tlfstrfate are looal public oorporatfons of the samegeneral charaoter a8 municipal corporatioshe. 0

. They are defined ae quasf-municipal corporations, and derive their powers by delegation fFom the state. They are state agencies, erected and employed for the purpose of adminfstering the etate ‘8 syetem of publio 

### schools.”Hon. Fred C. Brlgman, Jr., page 2 (S-31)

In the case of Treadawav v- Whitney 13.D.. 205 S.W.2d 97 (Tex.Clv.App. 13m In d&iding that plalntlff could not hold the school district liable for the negllgence of ite agent school bus driver, the court aaid:

“Just because the services rendered in this respect, are performed withfn the limits of the city does not makesuch functions loaal in nature but their effeot and lmportance are statewide and are performed for the benefit of 811 the people., There are manyrespects in which a city can act In a proprietary capacity, but ft Is hard to imagine howa school district could act fn imch a Capac.ttY, the purpose for which it 1s created being purely & overnmentali andwhen casrylng out the func ions for which It was thus created ff could aat only 89 anagent of the state. 9 *” Thecourt in th@ case of SoNthweatern Broadgo* v. 051 &enter &oadca%tlng C’ 0.x, 0S.W.sd .Clv,App, 1947, wror ref. N.RsE.r say%:

“AnIndependent school district is a quasi-municipal corporatIoni Under the law it 9,s entrusted with t&e duty of managing the schools.to~ the e&ent of the power delegated,
~‘b:t;has be@%said that the publla school 8y%t%hr A%a part of the State &wernmente pqt&& Maws, 120Tex. 383, 40 S.W.2d 31. ArtSole 7343, Vernon’s Clvll Statutea; provides in port: I, * Inrle~pendentschool dfstrlct.0 may oollecii ihefr delfnqu#??t tax&s a%above provided for eftfoe &adtown@. 9 qT%e school board.may, whea the delinquent tax lists andrecoz”da ape
.roperly prepared and ready for suit% to be riled, instruct the aounty attorney to file said suit+. If the school board fn8truots the CoU?dy at%Orney to file safd suite andhe fails or refuse8 to do BQwithin sfxty day6 the school board ..*Ran. Pred C. Brlgman, Jro5 page 3 (S-31)

may employ some other attorney of the county to file suft. The county attorney, ,or other attorney, filing tax suits for independent school districts, shall be enCltled to the same fees as provided by law in suits for State and county taxes, = =”
It is the oplnlon of this office that the collection of a tax levfed by an independe~nt school district. is an act of a State agency, and therefore the act of the State, and thus I.f the co~unty attorney should be employed by private clients to enjoin the collection .of such ttax he would be “of counsel advers:e,ly to the Statm” in contravention of Art;l,c’l’e 35Z2, V.CiG,P.

The collection of a tax levIed b; an, Independent school Ol,str;&ct ,xs en act of the St.te. Ar ’t:i$Le 32, ,V.C.,CiP-, proh$b$ts a c~~wmty attoxzgy being emp&oyed as counsel a&versely t,0the State. ‘Therefore, a COutlty attorney maynot be employed as counsel for a private client to enjoin the aol~ectfon of a tax levied by an independent schg~l district.
Yours very truly, APPROVRD: J. C. Davis, Jr.’ County ilffairs DivUion JOHNB&JSREPPERD Attorney General

Willis E, Gresham Reviewer Robert S. Trottf First Assistant Aaslietant

John Den Shepperd Attorney General