OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEYCSENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable John C. Merburger 

bounty Attorney, Fayette Couaty 

LI Grange, Texas 

Deer Sir r 

we eohowledge rece 

1941, with atteo 

transfer of wage 

April 9, 194l, w 

tendent or Faye 

the a8algnor 1 

triot8 0r Feye 

tb the r0ii0d 

ter dated April 25, 

an 'es8lgnment end 

Bsuleh Thompson on 

h the County Superinin your letter that 

oommon eohool dimur oplnlon in reaponae 

.ebove question 16 entswered in 

how should ruoh payzm&s be made? 

sable to mite one Voucher in the 

teaoher's salary earned payable to 

end assignor or one to the assignee 

gnment end one to the earignor for the 

balano e9 

“3. Ii the iirst question ia answered in the 

arrirmative may the County 3Up8rint8ndtsnt require 

that the original asrlgnment be deposited with him 

berore he oen be held liable for iallure to meke 

payment in aooordanoe with the request of the aruignse?w 
Honoreblo John C. Marburger, peg0 2 

Artiale 28834, Vernon’s Annotated Ststutea, enaated 

by the 46th Leglaletura, reeds, in part, as follows1 

*Art. 26834. Assignment, transfer or pledge 

or compensation ot teaohera or aohool employees 

nYeotion 1. Deilnltlon-Teeoher end Sohool 

Baployee; The terms ‘teaoher,’ end 'Bohool 

entployee,l within the pro~ialona of thlr hat shell 

be held end deosd to embreoe and inolude any person employed by any Publio Sohool System, Independent Sohool Diatrlot, or Common School District, 

in this Stete’ln en exeoutive, admlnlatretive or ’ 

olerloal oepeolty, or as e superintendent, prfnolpal, 

teaoher, or instructor, end any parson employed by 

a university, or oollego, or other educetlonel institution in an exooutlve, adminiatretive or 

olericel oepaoity, or as 4 professor, or 1 natruotor, or in any similar oapaoity. 

wee. 2. An assignment, trenafer, ple?,ge, or 

similar Instrument exeodted by any teeoher or aohool 

amployse, wherein any aalery or wages, or any lntereat therein or part thereof, then due or rhioh ney 

beoom due to auoh teaaher or aohool employee under 

en existing contract cl employment, shall be vslld 

and enioraeable, provided that suoh assignment, 

transfer, or pledge be in writing end aoknowledqed 

in the same menner es required ior the eoknowledgment 

oi tl deed or other instrument for registration, end 

provided further th&t if auoh instrument be executed 

by a mrrfed person it shall also be exeouted and eoknowledged by his or her spouse in suoh manner. Suoh 

en assignment, trenaier, or pledge shall br valid 

only to the extent that the indebtedness secured 

thereby is a valid obligation. Any aohool district; 

oollegr, university or other sduoetional Inati~Utlon 

County Sup2rlntendent, or eny disbursing agent there&m 

shall be quthorlsed to honor suoh haalgnment without 

being l ubjeot to any lieblllty thereior to the teacher 

or aohool employer so ereouting auoh aaaignment~ end 

any sum paid to any aaal~nee in aaoordenoe with the 

terms of any auoh eaalgnnent shell be deemed to bo 

a peymant to or ror the eooount oi such teaaher or 

sohool employee; but auoh assignment shall be valid 

and l ntoroeeble only to the extent of any 8alary 

291 
292 

Honorable John C. Ytirburger, page 3 

whloh nay be due or may become due and eemed 

by suoh teaoher and l ehool employee during the 

oontlnuanoa of his or her emplopmentby auoh 

aohool diatrlot, oollege, university, or aducatlonal inatitutl0n.e 

In OUT Gpinion No. C-2141, dated April 8, 1940, we 

held that the ebove quoted statate olearly authorlzea a teeoher 

to eaalgn his or her salary In the manner therein stipulated. We 

also held in the same opinion that It la the right and duty ot tte 

employing diatrlot to honor auoh asalgnmenta when the same are 

regularly ereouted snd duly presented by the erlrignee for payment. 

We have also held In our Opinion No. o-2643, dated August 

27, 1940, that en aeslgnmcnt authorized by hrtlole 2883a which la 

not notarized es required by statute *Is entirely 1nvelld.e 

Aoosrding to the aopy of the assignment and trnnsrer 

forwarded to us in your letter, the assignment in thia instanoe 

waa not *aoknowledged lo the same manner as required for the BCknowledgement of a deed or other instrument or regletretlonw as 

required by titio1.e 288%. It this la true with relerence to 

the oriqlnsl aaslgnment it is our aonsldered opinion that ths 

aaaignment in question la invalid. Opinion Ho. O-2643. 

For your lnformetlon and oonvenlenos we are enoloslng 

herewith a true end oorreot copy of our Opfnlon No. O-2141 end 

Opinion No. O-2643. 

In response to your queatlon number one, it is our 

opinion that aaslgnmenta of this nature, when exeoirted-and aoknovledged in acoordanoo with tbo statutory prorlslona, are 

ralld and should be reoognlzed by the oounty superintendent. 

In reply to your second question, it is our opinion 

that If would be edvlaabJo to stake papent to the esaignee end 

assignor by aeparata touohera, This, however, la n metter that 

should be worked out by the oounty euperlntendent. 
Honorable John C. Marburger, page 4 

In response to yo;rr third question, It is our opinion that the oounty superintendsnt tar the legal right to require that the original assignment be deposited with him before 

payment is made to the assignee. The duly and legally l xeouted 

arsigamcat lr the only authority that the oounty superintendent 

has to make payment to anyone other than the assignor, an& we 

think good buaineas practioe requires that he insist oa the tiling 

with hilp of the original assignment before payment. is made aooordlng to its term3 aad provleionr. 

Trusting that we hare sufiiclently answered your inquiry, 

wo are 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEY - -.--- 

: tiEN.MA.Ij 

XTTO:iY GE?iiRAL OF TEXAS 

Assistant