661 

OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Iionorable John 8. Winters 

Ez8outlve Dlrrotor 

State Department of Pub110 Welfare 

Austin 3, Teraa 

Eear Sir: 

We are pleased to refly ,,$a ~&UP letter oi‘Be&aber 20, 1944, la whioh you reQu8rt the opinloa of this department on the above o&pti 

Y 

ed +ibJect.,. 

\,./’ .::’ 

The facts Oolltalned ‘0 the r&orandum rubmitted 

with yc)ur letter ar8P4%+r8$ly~ ‘Ppat’~(t 8XtOrt8d $r5.00 oash 

from B on th8 proml#@ tt#t”whe (A)~ wod%d get B’s husband a 

grant of old age mSititaoC8. lTh8 f Uil ice 

for thls extraorclin~y servlci*vas $68, r 

A charged B 

Oj $15.00 oash aad 

the balance to be paid out df,the old a&e asSi8tanCe grant 

after it vu obtaiwd;.~ 

e-s t. I\, ,;? i 

Ye ilr8 Of t’he o&Ulop.ihat the abOV8 set Of iaCt8, 

if true; cenet$tuto a flolat$,@R of Bbotioa 32 0; r the public 

Yelie &it of 1941, the~~Ba& being Pl’ticlb 6950, Vernon’8 

rmnotateq~ civil..pt.ytss, which read8 u Sollows; 

“Jt sh& tie unlawful ror any attorney at 

lf&h olll,et$cirn99 infaot, or any other person, 

firm h2.r i%rp*ation vhat sower, represent Ina aw 

appllcBot ~‘rsolplent of assistance to the aged, 

to the ne& bliad, or to any llsedp dependent 

child, or for any child usUs.re service with 

resp8ct t0 any application befOr the State Department, or any of its agenta, to charge a fee 

ior his services in excess of Ten Dollars ($10) 

ln aiding or reprcsentiag any such applicant before the State Department, or for any other 
Honorable John Ii. Winters, page 2 

service in l ldlnsuch g apFIlcant to secure asslstanoa or servloe. It Shall 1ik8V188 be t?nlawful for any person, rum or oorForatlon, to 

advertise, hold hhS8lf out for or sollclt the 

procurement of assistance or aarvlce.” 

SubS8Otlon (3) of s8CtiOll 34 9l’OVld88 the 98tity 

and reads in part as iollovs : 

I 

or whoever violates section 32 or 

S8CtiO;l j3k this AOt, shall be guilty of a mlsdormnor, and upon oonvlotlon thereof, shall be 

fined eny sum not more than One fiundrsd Dollars 

18 

100) or be lnprlroned for not less than sir 

) months, nor more than two 

both so fined and ~pvIson8d.n 

(2) years, or be 

Further, you inquire whether or not it vould be 

la violation of Section 33 of the Public u8lis.re Act of 1941 

for the State Department to furnish the county attorney vlth 

whatever information may be eontalned in the case record of 

the husband of the said B, and vhether or not the worker may 

appear la court and testify es to the lnformatlcn which she 

obtained while octlng in the capacity of a worker ulth the 

State Iepartvbent. 

Your second question 1s prompted by the Frotlslons of Seotlon 33 (1), which reads as follovsr 

"It shall be unlavful, SXOeDt for 9urpoS88 

dlr8OtIy OOiur8Ct8d vlth the administration of 

general asslstancs, old ax8 assistance, aid to 

the blind, or aid to dependent children. and in 

cccoraance with the rules and ragtiatlons of the 

3tate Department, for any person or persons to 

solicit, disclose, recelVe, mak8 us8 Of, Or t0 

authorlse, k~oul~gly permit, pertlolpate la, or 

aCqUieSC8 in the use Of, 8.ny list Of, Or naI~8s 

Of, or any information concerning, persons appiylug for or receiving such assistance, directlg or Indirectly derived Srom the records, Papers, 

filea, or COm~iCatiOnS Of the State I%F~tVWnt 
663 

or subdlvlslons or agenoles thereof, or acquired 

in the oours8 of the performance of official 

duties . ” (Underscoring ours) 

It is noted then that lnformatlori secured by the 

3tate Eepartment in admlnlstering the various provlslons of 

this Act 1s confld8ntl@1, and ve think properly so. The 

leglslatlv8 intent or the public policy maifert by Section 

33, supra, 1s V8u 8Xpr8sS8d ln the 0888 Of Goopersberg v. 

Taylor, (Sup. ct. Of a. I. 1933) 266 If. Y. Supp. 359, Vherela the court, 10 construllrg a similar provlslo~ of the public U8ifU8 law 0s H8U York, said: 

I) The pub110 policy expressed In this 

statuti k’founded upon the d8slrablllty that 

the identity Of those aCO8ptilAg.pUbliO r8118f 

should Rot be dlsalos8d lest vorthy rsclpfents 

be discouraged from applying tor r8118f by reason Of the publloity to which they might be subjected. . . .* 

By Opinion go. G-2122, addressed to Xonorable Geo. 

a. Sheppard, this departaent held that the COnptrOlleP vas 

not authorized to furnish to the general pub110 the old age 

warrant register and llst 0r olalms on file in that OfflC8. 

Later, by Oplnlon Nor o-4976, addressed to Honorable Bomer Garrison, Jr., Dlreotor Of the Department Of Public Safety, V8 said: 

"The Publlo Welfare Act of 1939, repealed by 

Act8 of the 47th Legislature, contained a corresponding provision to Section 33, suprar Refarrlng 

to records Of the tipartlnent of Public welfare, 

the Act of 1939 provided that such records shall 

be open t0 lnap8ctlon only t0 p8rsons duly authorized by the State, or the Ullitsd States, t0 

Mik8 such Inspection in conIi8otlonvlth their Off lcial duties. The Act 0s 1941 houever makes no 

such 8XC8ptlOu. 

“It is therefore the opinion of this department that the State Department of Public W81fW8 

is not permitted to furnish the Texas DspartmeQt 

or public Safety with a list of names or Persons, 

nor any information concerning person8 applying 
iionorable John 11. Winters, page 4 

for or r808iVlEig l SSlStaQC8 through the State 

~D8p&lPeQt Of Public w8lfsF8." 

You mill note then that this departnent, by its 

3plnlons, has realously guarded th8 confidential nature of 

this iQfOrMtiOn iQ UU8S Vh8r8 the 1RfOrplatlOQ is to be 

used for purposes in no way oonnected with the adainlstratlon 0s the provlslons 0s this Act. 

Bovovor , Under the faOt8 here lnvo1vod, Ye -8 or 

the oplniaa that the information r8qU8St8d is to be used for 

pUFpOS88 direOtly oON&eOted Vlth th8 adril%iStP’stfOQ Of the 

Act. By the expresr terts of Section 33, you are authorfeed 

to furnish information, . for purposes dlrootly connected vlth the adm.inlstrk~on of general asslstanoe. . . ." 

Such information must be furnished in accordance with the 

rules and regulations adopted by the State Depsrtaent as provided by Section 33 (2), which reads 8a follovst 

"The rule-making power of the Stat8 Departm8nt shall include the pover to establish and 

enforce reasonable rules and regulations governlng the ouetodg, use, and pvoservatlon of the 

records, papers, fii8S, and communications of the 

State DopartPrent and its local oifloers. Uhereever, under provisions of law, names and addr8sses 

0s r8olpl0nts of public asslstanco are fumlshed 

to or held by any other agency or department Of 

government, such agency or d8p8rtm8nt~of government shall be required to adopt r8gulatlons nec8SS&Lry to prevent the publication of lists thereof or their us8 for purposes not direotly oonnocted vlth the admlnlstratlon of public asslstante." 

Examining the Act as a vhole, Ye find other pertinent provlslons: 

"Sec. 4. The Stat8 Department shall be 

changed with the adminlstratlon of the welfare 

activities of the State as hereinafter provided. 

The State Department shall: 

n 

. . . . 

-I 
665 

Honorable John H. Winters, page 5 

“(5) Asslat other departmentr, agencier and 

lortitutionr of the local State and Federal GOTernmenta, vhen l o requested and cooperate vlth 

such agencies vhen sxpedlent, in performing aerrices la oonformlty with the purpose. or this Act; 

I . . . . ” (Undderroorlw oum) 

By the provlrlonr or thlr Seatlou, when oonstrued 

in connection with other provlalonu oi the Act, it becomes 

your duty to iurnlrh the proneouting officer vlth ouch lnformation a8 may rhov or tend to ahov that a criminal act 

has occurred. Thatll, that the prorlrloaa OS Section 32 

have been violated. This lnformatloo l hould be furnished 

in accordance vlth rules promulgated by the State Department and only such lnformatlon aa 18 necessary to ahov that 

a violation has occurred should be furnlrhed. Perswal 

data coacernlng family statue , etc., vhloh vould in no vay 

be relevant to a prosecution for a violation Of provision8 

of this Act, should not be furnlahed. 

In adopting ruler ooncernlng the use of information in your posresslon by others, ve suggest you keep in 

mind not only the provisions of the statute, but also the 

legislative latent aa expressed la the Coopersberg came, 

supra. 

We see no objectloa to your rield worker appearing in court and offering ruoh testimony as the court may 

ad&. 

HTBD : db 

Trusting this fully anavera your inquiry, Ye are 

Very truly your8 

Assistant 

R. T. Bob Donahue