October 22~, 1963 

Honorable J. W. Edgar Opinion No. C-166 

Commissioner of Education 

Texas Education Agency Re: In view of the threeAustin, Texas year llmltetl,on set out 

in Article 2781, Vernon's 

Clvll Statutes, whether 

the teacher contract In 

question Is a valid contract, under the faots 

and circumstances outDear Dr. Edgar: lined. 

We quote from your letter of October 4, 1963, In which 

you requested an‘oplnlon es~follows: 

"This Agency has been requested by the 

board of trustees of an Independent school 

dlstrlct to obtain en opinion from your offlee on a submitted teacher contract situation. 

The Independent school district Involved does 

not now, nor In current pest years has it had 

e soholastlc population of 5,000 or more net.- 

essary to authorize issuance of teacher contracts for periods exceeding three years. 

Article 2781, Vernon's Civil Stetuteo. 

"Admlttedlg, X holds a valid teacher contract dated Deaember 8, 1961, whloh tiploys him 

foi. the period beginnl aaly 1, 1961, (for w61- 

$41962-63 and 1963-68 and terminating June 30, 

. 

"After having served one year (1961-62) under 

that three year contract, then In the early pert 

of its aeaond year on Deoember 4, 1962, the sahool 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 2 (C-166 ) 

board awarded him a second contract to extend 

his tiervices with the' district, wherein lt~purported to contract him for an additional two 

years beginning July 1, 1964 (for 1964-65 and 

1965-66) and terminating June 30, 1966. 

'Mr. X Is now serving as superintendent In 

the third and last year for which he was employed 

under the first contract. 

"Currently the time remaining to run under 

both contracts, assuming the latter Is but an 

extension of the former, does not exceed three 

years. But on December 4, 1962, when he purportedly was contrac~ted for two additional years, 

the total time then existing to serve out both. 

'contracts exceeded three years: VIZ., the remaln- 

~lng part of the 1962-63 year (seven months) and 

the 1963-64 year covered In his first contract; 

the .years 1964-65, 1965-66 covered in his .second 

contract. 

'In view of the three-year limitation set 

,~out In Artlole 2781 and In the light of the 

decision ln.Lynch v. Crockett I.S.D., 244 S.W.2d 

564 (Tex.Clv.App. 1951, no writ), an opinion Is 

requested on the following submitted lnqulry: 

"Whether the teacher con&act dated December 

1962, Is e valid effective contract, under the 

facts and clrcumstances herein outlined. 

Article 2781, Vernon's Civil Statutes, which Mntrols 

the length of time the Independent school district Involved may 

contract with e superintendent, reeds In part es follows: 

'?he Board of Trustees of.any city or. 

town or any Independent school district may 

employs e superintendent, prlnolpel, teacher, 

or other executive offlaers In the sahools 

therein for a term not to exoeed three years, 

. . . I' 

The provisions of this Article prohibit any contract In 

excess of three years, and It Is clear that any contract In excess of the time specified by Article 2781, Vernon's Civil Statutes, 

Is void. Lynch v. Crockett Independent &ho01 District, et al., 

244 S.W.2d 5b4 (Tex.Clv.App. 1951). 

-809- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 3 (C-166 ) 

By entering Into the second contract on December 4, 

1962, the Board of Trustees of the Coleman Independent School 

District contracted for a total time, on that date, ,under both 

contracts, In excess of'three years. The obvious legislative 

Intent cannot thus be obviated. This they are specifically prohibited from doing under the provisions of Article 2781, Vernon's Civil Statutes; We think that the llmltatlons contained 

In this statutory provision lead to the Inevitable conclusion 

that the Legislature Intended to llmlt the total time of such 

employment dontracts to three years. 

We are, therefore, of the opinion that the Board of 

Trustees of Coleman Independent School District exceeded their 

statutory authbrlty on December 4, 1962, by entering Into the 

second contract which, when taken with the first contract resulted 

In a contractual obligation of the district In excess of three 

years. It Is, therefore, our opinion that the December 4, 1962 

contract Is void. 

SUMMARY 

;:. 

Article 2781, Vernon% Clvfl Statutes, prohibits 

the: Board of !l?ustees of an lndependent~ school district 

from'contractlng with a superintendent or teacher for 

more than three years whether one or more contracts 

are utilized. 

’ ~~... 

Yours very truly, 

WAGOONER .CARR 

Attorney Qenerel 

,..,.~ 

JB:wb:mkh ., "

APPROVED:' 

OPINION COMMITTEE "~ 

W. V. Geppert, Chalrmin 

Ftied D. Ward 

Joe Trlmble 

Norman Suarez 

Pat Ball&y 

*z 

. 

APPROVEDFOR THE ATTORNEY OT!XERAL _ 

BY: Stanton Stone .I 

-810-