EA EY GENERAL 

July 12, 1962 

Honorable William J. Lowe 

County Attorney 

Opinion NO. ~~-1380 

Donley County Courthouse Re: Whether a candidate, who 

Clarendon, Texas failed to timely file a 

sworn statement of his campaign contributions and expenditures, as required by 

Art. 14.08 Election Code, 

may be certified for the 

Dear Mr. Lowe: General Election ballot. 

Your letter requesting an opinion reads in part as follows: 

"There were two candidates elected for 

the run-off for the office of Justice of 

the Peace in the second primary, and the 

candidate who won the run-off did not 

timely file his required list of contributions and expenditures of his campaign. 

The last date on which the candidate 

could have filed such list was April 27, 

1962, but he did not file it until May 4, 

1962. 

"Will you kindly let me know whether 

or not such candidate can be certified 

as the Democratic nominee for such office?" 

Article 14.08, Texas Election Code, reads in part as follows: 

I! 

. * . 

"(b) Each candidate whose name appears 

on the ballot at a first primary election 

or a special election and each opposed candidate whose name and whose opponent's name 

appear on the ballot at a general election 

shall file a sworn statement, not less than 

seven (7) nor more than ten (10) days prior 

to the day of each such election, of all 

gifts and loans previously received and of 

all gifts, loans and payments made and all 

debts incurred and obligations incurred or 
Honorable William J. Lowe, page 2 Opinion No, ~~-1380 

contracted for future use in behalf of such 

person's candidacy for office. The statement must include all such gifts, loans, 

payments, debts and obligations made or 

incurred whether before or after the announced or filed candidacy of such person. 

Not more than ten (10) days after the 

election the candidate shall also file 

a supplemental sworn statement of all 

gifts and loans received prior to the 

election and of all gifts, loans and 

payments made and debts and obligations 

incurred prior to the election not specifically included in the sworn statement 

filed prior to the election." As amended 

Acts 1955, 54th Leg., p. 503, ch. 145, 

Sec. 1. 

"(c) Each candidate whose name appears on the ballot at a second primary 

election shall file a similar sworn 

statement not less than seven (7) nor 

more than ten (10) days prior to the day 

of the election and a similar supplemental sworn statement not more than ten 

(10) days after the day of the election." 

As amended Acts 1955, 54th Leg., p. 503, 

ch. 145, Sec. 1. 

II 

. . . 

"(h) Any candidate falling to file 

such sworn statement at the time provided or swearLng falsely therein shall 

forfeit his right to have his name placed 

upon the bal1o.c at any subsequent primary, 

special, or general election." Acts 1951, 

52nd Leg., p. 1097, ch. 492, Art. 244. 

Thorp v. Murchison, 259 S.W.2d 614 (Civ.App. 1953) was an 

election contest in which appellant tried to take advantage of 

Section (h) of Art. 14.08, Election Code, and contested the right 

of the appellee to hold the office of Constable which he had won 

in the General Election, on the ground that appellee was not entitled to have his name on the ballot, since he failed to file 

expense accounts in connection with his candidacy for such office 

during the Democratic primary. The Court held that Section (h), 

Art. 14.08 was not available to be used by a defeated candidate 

to contest the right of the winner of the election to hold office. 
Honorable William J. Lowe, page 3 Opinion No. WW-1380 

Owen v. Longuemare, 268 S.W.2d 701 (Civ..App. 1954) involved 

an application by relator for a writ of mandamus to compel the 

County Democratic Chairman to print relator's name on the Democratic primary ballot. The County Chairman had evidenced his intention to leave relator's name off the primary ballot because 

it had been made known to the County Chairman that Relator did 

not file his sworn statement of gifts, 

time required in Art. 14.08. 

loans and payments at the 

The Court stated at page 701: 

The Court directed that a writ of mandamus issue to compel the 

County Chairman to place Relator's name on the primary ballot. 

"In our opinion such Code does not 

place the responsibility upon the Chairman of the Committee or the Committee, 

or authorize him or it to determine whether or not Art. 14.08 of the Election 

Code, V.A.T.S. has been violated, and 

to refuse to place the name of Relator 

on the ballot. In our opinion the provision of Art. 14.09 of the Election 

Code, V.A.T.S., providing for a quo warranto proceeding to enforce the provisions of the statute is exclusive, and 

such provision has not been here invoked 

or complied with." 

The case of State ex rel. Butchofsky v. Crawford, 269 S.W.2d 

536 (Civ.App. 1954) appears to be the first case filed in the manner required by the Election Code. The District Attorney brought 

the suit in the name of the State, in behalf of one Butchofsky, 

against Crawford, to determine the right of Crawford to have his 

name placed on the ballot as a candidate for Justice of the Peace. 

Mr. Crawford then held that office, was seeking Fe-election, and 

no other person had filed at the closing date fixed by law for 

such filing. In 1954, Sec. (b) of Art. 14.08, Election Code, 

provided that sworn statements be filed by candidates at intervals of twenty (20) days, beginning on the 60th day next preceding the day of election. 

May 25, 1954. 

The 60th day before the primary was 

Mr. Crawford did not file a statement with the 

County Clerk on that day, 

1954. 

but did file It at 9 a,.m.on May 26, 

!the Court held that with respect to whether a sworn statement was filed at all, the statute is mandatory, and a sworn 

statement must be filed..,The Court also held that the exact 

time of filing is directory, but that a candidate must reasonably 

and substantially comply with the time of filing. The Court 
Honorable William J. Lowe, page 4 Opinion No. ~~-1380 

held that in this instance, the candidate was only one day late 

and that he had substantially complied with the statute. The 

Court directed County Chairman Longuemare to print the name of 

the candidate Crawford on the ballot for the Democratic primary. 

The Court stated at page 542: 

"In holding that the statute is mandatory in requiring a candidate to file this 

statement and is directory as to the time 

when such statement must be filed we do 

not mean that a candidate must not substantially comply with the provisions of the 

act as to time of filing this statement. 

This he must do, and his failure to do so 

will be grounds for excluding his name 

The Court also stated the reason for requiring sworn statements of expenses, loans and gifts, when it said at page 542: 

II 

. . . The purpose of requiring such 

statements to be filed is that the same 

may be open to public inspection that 

the voters may determine what persons 

are influencing by contributing money 

or credit, or other substantial aid to 

a candidate, that the public may lntelligently determine whether or not they 

should support such candidate. . . .' 

The first Primary was held on May .5, 1962. If the candidate 

who was late in filing his expense account had not filed such 

sworn statement until after the Primary election had already been 

held, it would have certainly violated the purpose of the statute 

as set out above. Whether or not filing such statement on the 

day before the election, instead of not later than seven (7) days 

before the election as required by the statute, constitutes "reasonable" and "substantial" compliance is a fact question to be 

determined in the light of all the circumstances. Neither the 

County Chairman nor the County Executive Committee are authorized 

to make this determination. The County Chairman and County Executive Committee must certify the name of the candidate who received a majority of votes ins the Second Primary, without regard 

to whether or not he failed to timely file his sworn statement 
Honorable William J. Lowe, page 5 Opinion No. WW-1380 

of expenses, gifts and loans as orovided c-----~--. for --- Sn --- Sets. ----- (h\ \-, anA -._- 

(c) of Art. 14.08, Election C 

Any determination of these facts, to have _ _ 

effect, must be determined by the courts. 

ode. Owen v. Longuemare,.supra. 

! any legal and binding 

SUMMARY 

The County Chairman and the County Executive 

Committee must certify the candidate who received 

the majority of votes in the Second Primary as the 

party's nominee for Justice of the Peace, even 

though such candidate did not timely file his sworn 

statement of expenses, gifts and loans as provided 

for in Sections (b) and (c), Art. 14.08, Election 

Code. 

Whether filing of a sworn statement of expenses, gifts and loans, only one (1) day before 

the election, instead of at least seven (7) days 

before the election, constitutes reasonable and 

substantial compliance with Sections (b) and (c) 

of Art. 14.08, Election Code, is a fact question, 

which can only be determined by the courts. 

Yours very truly, 

WILL WILSON 

Attorney General of Texas 

F3F:rk 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

John Reeves 

Elmer McVey 

Tom Hunter 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: Le,onard Passmore 

Riley Ebgene Fletcher 

Assistant