., ’ 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General 

Supreme Court Bullding 

P. 0. Box 12548 

Austin, TX. 78711. 2548 

512,475.2501 

Telex 9101874.1367 

Telecopier 5121475-0266 

714 Jackson. Suite 700 

Dallas. TX. 75202-4506 

2141742-8944 

4824 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 

El Paso, TX. 79905.2793 

9151533.3484 

p 01 Texas. Suite 700 

,,ous,on, TX. 77002.3111 

713023.5686 

806 Broadway, Suite 312 

Lubjm3x. TX. 79401.3479 

8061747.5238 

4309 N. Tenth. Suite B 

McAllen. TX. 78501-1685 

5121682-4547 

200 Main Plaza. Suite 400 

San Antonio. TX. 78205.2797 

512/225-4191 

An Equal Opportunity/ 

Affirmative Action Employer 

P 

The Attorney General of Texas 

November 9, 1983 

Honorable Bob Bush 

Chairman 

committee on Judiciary 

Texas House of Representatives 

P. 0. Box 2910 

Austin, Texas 78769 

Dear Representative Bush: 

Opinion No. JM-90 

Re: Whether a county court at 

law must be located at the 

county seat 

You ask whether the legislature may create a county court at law 

to sit at some location within the county other than the county seat. 

Section 1 of article V of the Texas Constitution provides in part 

as follows: 

The Legislature may establish such other courts 

as it may deem necessary and prescribe the 

jurisdiction and organization thereof . . . . 

county courts at law are established under authority of this 

provision. Sterrett v. Morgan, 294 S.W.2d 201 (Tex. Civ. App. - 

Dallas 1956, no writ). The constitutional county courts are 

established by article V, section 15 of the Texas Constitution. See 

- 

also Tex. Const. art. V, 91. 

There is no constitutional provision which would require county 

courts at law to conduct their proceedings at the county seat. See 

Tex. Const. art. V, 91, cf. arts. V, §§15-17 (provisions on county 

judges, jurisdiction, and= of county court). 

Article 1602, V.T.C.S., provides that all terms of the county 

court be held at the county seat. However, this statute refers to 

county courts and not to county courts at law. Moreover, a statute is 

subject to amendment or implied repeal by a later statute. See, e.g., 

Popham V. Patterson, 51 S.W.2d 680 (Tex. 1932); Townsend V. Terrell, 

16 S.W.2d 1063 (Tex. 1929). Section 4 of article 1605~1-5, V.T.C.S., 

authorizes a commissioners court to designate facilities outside of 

the county seat as auxiliary courts for purposes of conducting 

non-jury proceedings. 

The constitutional provisions regarding county courts at law may 

be contrasted with article V, section 7, which provides that a 

p. 383 
Honorable Bob Bush - Page 2 (JM-90) 

district court “shall conduct its proceedings at the county seat of 

the county in which the case is pending, except as otherwise provided 

by law.” (Emphasis added). The underlined language was added by a 

1949 amendment. See HJR No. 22, Acts 1949, 51st Session at 1496; 

Table I, Votes onProposed Amendments to the Texas Constitution, 

1875-1949, Acts 1951, 52nd Leg., at 1621, 1627. 

Prior to the 1949 amendment to article V, section 7, the Texas 

Supreme Court held invalid the creation at Texarkana of a district 

court called the “Texarkana Court at Law” on the ground that a 

district court must be located at the county seat. Turner v. Tucker, 

258 S.W. 149 (Tex. 1924). Boston, and not Texarkana, is the county 

seat of Bowie County. The legislature granted the “Texarkana Court at 

Law” most of the jurisdiction in civil cases exercised by the district 

court within Bowie, as well as much of the jurisdiction exercised by 

the county court. The supreme court stated that “a court empowered to 

discharge principal functions of the district court must be regarded 

as a district court in giving effect to the command of the amendment.” 

258 S.W. at 150. The 1949 addition to article V, section 7 

invalidated this holding. 

The Turner v. Tucker court also relied on article IX, section 2 

of the Texas Constitution, which concerns the removal of the county 

seat. The opinion noted that a county seat was originally called the 

seat of justice in the county, and that to permit the establishment of 

the “Texarkana Court at Law” at Texarkana would remove the county seat 

without complying with the procedures set out in article IX, section 

Subsequent cases have ignored this secondary holding in Turner v. 

Tucker, or have overruled it sub silentio. The court of appeals in 

Jordan v. Crudgi.ngton, 225 S.W.2d 917 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort Worth 

1949, no writ), held that a statute establishing a court of domestic 

relations was unconstitutional. The court’s jurisdiction would be 

equal to that of a district court yet many provisions of the creating 

statute could not be constitutionally applied to a district court; for 

example, it di.d not require the court to sit at the county seat. The 

supreme court reversed and found the statute constitutional except for 

three provisions: it provided for terms of office of more than two 

years; provided for the removal of the judge and clerk by the juvenile 

board; and provided for a jury of fewer than twelve persons. Jordan 

v. Crudgington, 231 S.W.2.d 641 (Tex. 1950). 

In Cox v. Wood, 256 S.W.2d 841 (Tex. 1953), the supreme court 

held that a juvenile court was not required to sit at the county seat 

of Dallas County as it existed when Dallas became the county seat. 

Thus, the Turner v. Tucker discussion on article IX, section 2, has 

not been applied to legislatively created courts. See also Attorney 

General Opinion C-391 (1965) (1949 amendment to article V. section 7 

p. 384 
Honorable Bob Bush - Page 3 (JM-go) 

authorizes legislation locating district court elsewhere in county 

than at county seat). 

In our opinion, the legislature is authorized to create a county 

court at law to sit at some location in the county other than the 

county seat. 

SUMMARY 

The legislature may create a 

law to sit at some location in 

than the county seat. 

county court at 

the county other 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

TOM GREEN 

First Assistant Attorney General 

DAVID R. RICHARDS 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

Prepared by Susan L. Garrison 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Rick Gilpin, Chairman 

Jon Bible 

David Brooks 

Colin Carl 

Susan Garrison 

Jim Moellinger 

Nancy Sutton 

h 

p. 385