November 9, 

### 1965

Hon. R. Wplght Armstrong Oplnlon No. C340 Chairman, Board of Directors Texas ~Technologlcal Colleges. Re: Whether, under the facts 

### 5803El Camp0'Terrace aubmltted, a student is Fort Worth, Texas 

### 76107 properly classified as 'resident" ur "non+=esldent" for tuition purposes under Article 265&b, overDear Mr. Armstrong: non% Civil Statutes.

You 'have requested the opinion of this office on the above ~questlon. In this connection, you have furnished ua with the following facts:

"Ilsestudent in question Is a school teacher, having tau t school In the State of ~Texas for 'SIX 

### (6

Tyears. Last ~year, she went to Qermanyto teach in a service school and for the purpose of touring Germany, all as part of her further educationas a teacher. She 'wasout of the State of Texas on this temporary tour ten (10) months. She returned to Lame,sa,Texas, on July 2, 

### 1965. She registered at Texas Technological College on September 14, 

### 1965,and wasruled to be a non-resident for the purpose of paying tuition rates as provided in Article 

### !2654c, Vernon's Civil Statutes. The student has lived In Texas during her entire life and for the past 28years has been a resident of DawsonCounty, Texas. She is a qualified 

### voterof DawsonCounty, Texas, and voted in thatcounty last year as an absentee voter. The following pertinent portions ol Article 26540, Vernon's Civil Statutes.are quoted:

-2583-Hon. R. Wright Armstrong, page 2 (C- 

### 540)

5 “Section l(e)

. Theterm ‘residence’ as used In this Act means ‘domicile’; the term

‘resided In’ means ‘domiciled In’; provided, the Qoverning Board of each institution required under this Act to charge a nonresident registration fee Is hereby authorized and directed to follow such rules, regulations and interpretations as are issued by the Commission on Higher Education for the effective anduniform administration of the non-~,,.. resident tuition ‘provisions of this Act.

.. Any such.rules, regulations,. and Interpreta-’ tlons’as maybe issued by said Commlss.lon shall .also, be,furnished to the presidents or ,:. ” executive .heada of public junior colleges In this state. ,For the purposes of this Act, the status of a student as a ‘resident’ or
‘non-resident 1student, is to be determined ,, ,. as follows: .(I) Anonresident student $8hereby defined to be a student of less than twenty-one I Lg!Z,);;arse~sa~;.
. .; or a student of twentyY age or over whoresldes out of,the state or whohas not been a resident of the state ,twelve (,12) months immediately .precedlx the .date of ~reglstratlon. *’ (Emphasis ,supplled) The Texas Commission on Higher Education has issued Its rules snd regulations lnterpretlng.the, non,-resident tuition provisions of the:‘above-quoted statute. These rules do not, however, provide any real assistance in tha’determinatlon of the question before ,us.. We must, therefore, ~turnto other sources for our solution.

The term “domicile” mayhave,a variety of slgnlflcatlons, dependent on its various applications. “Whathas been said to be the most comprehensive and correct definition which could be given ie that, in a strict legal sense, the domicile of a person la the place where he has his true, fixed, permanent homeand principal establishment, and to,,whlch, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning. 28 C.J.S.~ 

### 3DOMICILE,8 1. Also, “temporary residence, even.if long, merely for the purpose of transacting business or of engaging In employment, or for the sake of health or pleasure, with the Intention of returning to the original home, is not sufficient for the acquisition or 28 C.J.S. 19, S 11,. See also Peaoock vs. %%%a~~ 

### %:‘%‘68, 194 S.W.2d 

### 551 (1946),wherein it is

-2584-Hon. Ft.Wright Armstrong, page 

### 3 (C- 

### 540)

stated, at page 

### 555, "Adomicile which has once attached is retained until a newdomicile 1s attained.* i.

. .Before a change of domicile of anadult can be effected there must exist both the fact of personal presence Inkhe newplace and the intention to makethat newplace a~home.

Weturn nowto the problem of applylng,the statutes and legal Interpretations to the facts of the caseat hand. The student here Involved is a native Texan, and under the facts given, her domicile has been in pawson~County,,Texas, all her life. Her absence from this State, ~apparently from September, 

### 1964to July, 

### 1965,was pursuant to a teaching contract with an armedforces sohool in Germany, and for the purpose of touring Germany, all as part of her further eduoatlon as a teacher. Luring her absence from Texas she paid her poll tax and,voted absentee In DawsonCounty, Texas. Upon the expiration of her teaching contract and tour of Germany, she returned to Lawson County. It 1s the opinion of this office that the foregoing facts constitute no basis for divesting the student of her established domicile in Texas.

Onthe basls of the facts submitted by you, it 1s the opfnlon oft this office that the student in question talned her BomlciIe l,nTexas and Is entitled to be charged resident tultlon~ rates under Art,lcle 

### 2654~~Vernon's Civil Statutes. reSGM'MARY Whena resident of Texas leaves the State under an armed forces teaching contract, and stays in Germanyfor the contract period, with the Intention of returning to his domicile In Texas, and returns to Texas upon the expiration of his contract, he has not relinquished his domicile in Texas. Such a oereon. under these facts. Is a resident of Texas for purposes of college tuition under Article 

### 26540,V.C.S. Very truly yours, WAGGONER

CAHH Attorney General

Assistant MLQ:ms:mkh -2k85-Hon. R. Wright Armstrong, page 4 (C-540)

APPROVED: OPINIONCOMMITTEE W.V. Geppert, Chairman Marietta.,Payne WadeAnderson John Reeves Terry Goodman APPROVEDFOR

THEATTORrJEy

GENERAL BY: T. B. Wright

-2586-