- .__ 

j February 26, 1974 

The Honorable Tom Hanna Opinion No. H- 244 

District Attorney 

Jefferson County Re.: Whether Article 

P. 0. Box 2553 6252~da, V. T. C.S., 

Beaumont, Texas 77701 granting re-employment rights to returning veterans, app,lies 

to teachers of an 

independent school 

Dear Mr. Han&: 

] 

/ district 

Your request for our opinion asks whether Article 6252-4a,V.,T.C.S.. 

grants re-employment rights Bnd other privileges to former school’district 

employees who Left their jobs kor the purpose’of active military service 

and who have since returned from active duty under honorab\e conditions. 

i 

ArticLe 6252-4a was am$nded by Acts 1967, 60th Leg., ch. 469, 

p. 1074 and now provides in papt: 

Sec. I “Any empldyee of the State of Texas or x 

political subdivisian, state institution, county or 

municipa~lity theredf, . . . who leaves his position 

for the purpose of bntering the Armed Forces of the 

United States . . . ishall, if discharged, separated 

or released. . . ujder honorable conditions, be 

restored to employkent in the same department, 

office, commissio; or board of the State of Texas 

or any political suti~division, state institution, county 

or municipality thereof. . . .‘I (emphasis added) 

Prior to the 1967 amenddent the statute granted re-employment rights 

only to “any employee of the State of Texas. ” Attorney General Opinion WW1443 (1962) held that the language “employee of the State” did not extend re- 

/ 

p. 1128 

1 

I 
- - .~ -~- -~- ___. --- .-.-,..- ,... ...,_,,,._ _ ,_. _ 

-. 

2’kx Hcr.orable Tom Hanna, page 2 (H-244) 

employment rights to employees of independent school districts or common 

school districts since school districts are not primarily agencies of the 

State, but rather are public corporations of the same general character as 

municipal corporations. 

However, since its amend+&slC,in 1967, the statute has applied both 

to state employees and to employees of x political subdivisioh. county or 

- 

municipality of the State. 

School dist&ts have been classified as political subdivisions of 

the State, Port Arthur Independent Schools District v. City of Groves, ,376 

S. W. 2d 330 (Tex. 1964); Watts v. Double Oak Independent School District, 

377 S. W. 2d 779 (Tex. Civ.App., Ft. Worth, 1964). no writ; King’s Estate 

v. School Trustees of Willacy County, 33 S. W. 2d 783 (Tex. Civ. App., 1930, 

error refused); and as quasi public corporations of the character of municipal corporations, University Interscholastic League v. Midwestern Universib 255 S. W. 2d 177 (Tex. 195,3); Love v, City of Dallas, 40 S. W. 2d 20 

(Tex. 1931); Southwestern Broadcasting Go. v. oil Center Broadcasting Co., 

210 S. W. 2d 230 (Tex. Civ.App., El Paso, 1947, ref. n. r.e.). And see 

Article 6252-6(2a), V. T. C. S., which defines “local po.litical .subdivisions” 

to include “counties, cities, towns, schoo.1 districts, flwd control districts, 

: , . and the like. I’ (eniphasis’idded) 

Therefore, in our opinion, Artic1.e 6252~da, as amended, does extend 

rr-employment iights to veterans returning to farmer positions with school 

districts of this State. See Attorney General Opinions M-250 (1968) and M886 (1971). 

SUMMARY 

Veterans returning to positions with school 

distri.cts of this State are given the right to re-employment in accordance with the provisions pf Article 6252- 

4a, V. T. C. S. 

// Attorney General of Texas 

p. 11,29 
The Honorable Tom Hanna, page 3 [H-244) 

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman 

Opinion Comrkttez 

p. 1130