July21,1972

Hon. Cecil M. Pruett Hutchinson County Attorney 630North Deahl Street Borger, Texas 79007

Dear Mr. Pruett: Opinion No. M- 1174
Re: Whether a county judge who signs a driver's license application for aminor under eighteen years of age thereby assumes personal liability for any subsequent negligence or misconduct of such minor inoperating amotor vehicle, pursuant to Subsection (b)of Section 7 ofArticle 6687b, Vernon's Civil Statutes, and related question
Your recent letter requesting the opinion of this office concerning the referenced matter states, inpart, as follows:
"OurCounty Judge has requested thatwe ask for an opinion as tohis personal liability in the event he signs an application for driver's license submitted tohim by aminor under 18 years of age.

,I

. . . . "Question No. 1

-5731-I

.

Hon. Cecil M. Pruett, page 2, (M-1174)

"Inthe event the County Judge signs the application of aminor under the age of 18years and over the age of 16years for a driver's license, asprovided inArticle 6687b, Section 7(b), does the County Judge and/or his bondsman become personally liable for any subsequent negligence orwilful misconduct of such minor inoperating amotor vehicle? "Question No. 2 "(a) IS it necessary that the father, mother, guardian, employer or County Judge sign the application of aminor not less than 15years of age for a driver's license under Article 668733,Section 12(d)? "(b) In the event the County Judge signs such application, does he and/or his bondsman become personally liable for the subsequent negligence orwilful misconduct of suchminor inoperating amotor vehicle?" Subsection (b)of Section 7 ofArticle 668713,Vernon's Civil Statutes, as amended, provides:

"(b) The Department (ofPublic Safety) shall not grant the application of anyminor under the ace of eiqhteen (18)years for an operator's, commercial operator's, chauffeur's license unless such application is signed by the father of the applicant, if the father is living andhas the custody of the applicant, othertiiseby themother orguardian having the custody of suchminor, or in the event aminor under the age of eighteen (18)years has no father, mother, or guardian. the license shall not be issued to the minor unlesshis application therefor is signed by his employer orby the county judge ofhis residence." (emphasis added.)

-5732-Hon. Cecil M. Pruett, page 3, (M-1174)

Section 8ofArticle 668713provides that: "Anyperson who has signed the application of aminor for a license may thereafter filewith the Department a request that the license of said minor sogranted be cancelled, which request shall be in writing and acknowledged before some officer authorized to administer oaths. Thereupon the Department shall cancel the license of said minor and the personwho signed the application of such minor shall be relieved from anv liabilitv bv reason ofhavinq siqned such application on account of any subsequent neqliqence orwilful misconduct of suchminor in operatinq amotor vehicle." (emphasis added.) The general rule of law applicable to your first question has been stated as follows:

"It is the general rule thatwhere a judgehas jurisdiction he isnot civilly liable for acts done in the exercise ofhis judicial function. A judicial officer cannot be called to account ina civil action forhis determination and acts inhis judicial capacity andwithin his jurisdiction, however erroneous. For amere error of judgment in the~executionofhis office, no action canbe maintained against a judge of any court, andhe should not be mulcted in costs or other forms of damages because of judgments rendered by him. This principle may be said tobe as old as thebeginning of)the English common law. It rests upon considerations ofpublic policy, its purpose being topreserve the integrity and independence of the judiciary, and to insure that judges will act on their own free, unbiased convictions, uninfluenced by any apprehensions of consequences. Indeed, it is said that on considerations ofpublic policy all judicial officers are absolutely privileged inwhat they speak, write, or do in the performance of their judicial acts, at leastwhere such statements

-5733-.

Hon. Cecil M. Pruett, page 4. (M-1174)

or acts are relevant and pertinent to thematter before them. Such acts are judicial acts and cannot form the basis formoney damages. The underlying reason for this rule ofprivilege is not the judicial character of the officer but the judicial character of the act: it is the public necessity that public agents engaged in the performance of apublic duty under compulsion of law should not suffer personally inperforming a judicial act for an error of judgment which the wisest and most circumspect cannot avoid. The rule of immunity does not extend to acts of a judgewhich areministerial rather than judicial in character." 46Am.Jur.2d 141-43, Judges, Sec. 72. The foregoing rule of immunity is followed inTexas. See, e.g., 33Tex.Jur.2d 381-83, Judges, Sec. 21; Krueqel v. Murphy, 126 S.W. 343, 345 (Tex.Civ.App. 1910, error ref.); Jarnagin v. Garrett, 69 S.W.2d 511, 514 (Tex.Civ.App. 1934, error ref.): Welch v. Kent; 153 S.W.2d 284 (Tex.Civ.App. 1941, nowrit); Penninqton v. State, 332 S.W.Zd 569, 570 (Tex.Crim. 1960): and Turner v. Pruitt, 161Tex. 532, 342 S.W.2d 422 (1961).

Thus, notwithstanding thebroad language of Section 8 ofArticle 6687b, which conceivably could bring county judges within itspurview and thus render them liable for aminor's driving negligence, we are of the opinion that the language must be read in conjunction with the common law rule of judicial immunity set forth hereinabove.

The further question tobe resolved in connection with your first question is: Is a county judge's signing of aminor's application for a driver's license, pursuant to Section 7of Article 668713,a judicial or aministerial act? Clearly, if the signing isbut aministerial act, the rule of judicial immunity would not apply.

-5734-Hon. Cecil M. Pruett, page 5, (M-1174)

A ministerial act has been defined as follows: I,

. . .The distinction between ministerial, and judicial and other official acts, seems to be, that where the lawprescribes and defines the duty tobe performed, with such precision and certainty as to leave nothing to the exercise of discretion, or judgment, the act is ministerial: but where the act tobe done involves the exercise of discretion or judgment indetermining whether the duty exists, it is not tobe deemed merely ministerial." Commissioner of General Land Office v. Smith, 5Tex. 471, 479 (1849).
We are of the opinion that Section 7 ofArticle 6687b, quoted supra, does not place aministerial duty on a county judgesto sign aminor's application for a driver's license, any more than itplaces such a duty on any of the other parties named in that Section. The law is clear that aminor becomes entitled to apply for a driver's license, solely inhis own right, when he attains the age of eighteen years. To qualify for a driver's license under the age of eighteen, he must not only have completed an approved driver training course (Subsection (a)of Section 7),but must also have the consent of his parent or guardian. The parent or guardian may or may not give his consent forvarious reasons, such as the under-eighteen minor's maturity, stability, sense of discipline and responsibility, or his lack of such qualities.

The county judge can sign the application for the minor onlywhen he has no father, mother, or guardian. Thus, the county judge isplaced in aposition of in loco parentis to theminor, and isvested with the absent parent-guardian's sense of discretion as towhether theminor should be granted a driver's license.

-5735-.

Hon. Cecil M. Pruett, page 6, (M-1174)

Inasmuch as Section 7ofArticle 668713imposes no mandatory ministerial duty on a county judge to sign an undereighteen minor's application for a driver's license, we hold that the county judge isperforming a discretionary judicial function incident tohis office, andprescribed by statute. In this capacity, and inview of the foregoing authorities, you are advised that in our opinion neither a county judge nor his bondsman becomes personally liable for any subsequent negligence orwilful misconduct of an under-eighteen minor whose driver's license application such county judge has signed.

Therefore, your first question is answered in the negative.
Your second question, in essence, is: Does Subsection (b)of Section 7 ofArticle 6687b require the signatures ofparents, guardians, employers, and county judges only on the applications of those under-eighteen minors between the ages of sixteen to eighteen years, or does it also require the signatures of those persons on the applications ofminors aged fifteen years?

Section 7 falls under theheading "Application of minors". As has heretofore been made evident, Subsection (b) sets forth the parties who must sign the application. However, Subsection (a)of Section 7 refers only tominors between the ages of sixteen to eighteen years.

Sections 4 and 12(d) ofArticle 668713provide three criteria whereby driver's licenses may also be issued to minors fifteen years of age in certain hardship situations. However, nowhere in these Sections is there a requirement that any of the foregoing persons must also approve the application of a fifteen year old minor.

It is an elementary rule of statutory construction that
"Inorder to arrive at aproper construction of a statute, and determine the exact legislative intent, all acts andparts of acts inpari materia

-5736-. .

Hon. Cecil M. Pruett. Page 7, (M-1174)

will, therefore, be taken, read, and construed together, each enactment inreference to the other, as though they were parts of one and the same law. Any conflict between their provisions will be harmonized, ifpossible, and effect will be given to all the provisions of each act if they can be made to stand together andhave concurrent efficacy.

II

. . . The rule proceeds on the supposition that several statutes relating to one subject are governed by one spirit and policy, and are intended tobe consistent andharmonious in their several parts and provisions." 53Tex.Jur.2d 282-84, Statutes, Sec. 186.
Statutes must also be construed ina reasonable manner, so that an absurd resultwill be avoided. g., atpp. 187-89, Sec. 126.While it is true that Subsection (b)of Section 7 is under the heading of "Application ofminors", ispart of the same Section 7 ofwhich Subsection (a)relates only to minors between the ages of sixteen to eighteen, andwhile it isalso true that neither Sections 4 nor 12(d), relating to minors aged fifteen, require the signatures of any adult person, it is nonetheless also a fact that Subsection (b)of Section 7 explicitly states that "TheDepartment shall not grant the application of anyminor under the ace of eishteen (18)vears"(emphasis added) for a driver's license until the signatures of the enumerated persons have also been obtained.

Viewed in light of the foregoing rules of construction, we think that Subsection (b)of Section 7 can reasonably be read in conjunction with Sections 4 and 12(d), relating to fifteen year old minors, and that the requirements of that Subsection apply to fifteen year old minors, aswell as those sixteen to eighteen. To hold otherwise would be to allow fifteen year old minors to apply, solely in their own right, for a driver's license, and deny this privilege to their older minor peers.
-5737-. .

Hon. Cecil M. Pruett, page 8, (M-1174)

We cannot believe the Legislature intended such an unreasonable, absurd and illogical differentiation. We must give the statute rational, reasonable, and sensible construction. 53Tex.Jur.2d 187, Statutes, Sec. 126.

You are therefore advised that it isnecessary for a father, mother, guardian, employer, or county judge to sign the application for a driver's license of aminor fifteen years of age, inaddition to the other requirements set forth in Section 12(d). Your question 2(a) is thus answered in the affirmative.

We are of the opinion that our answer toyour first question sufficiently answers your question 2(b), and you are advised that your question 2(b) is answered in the negative.
SUMMARY ------- (1)The doctrine of judicial immunity from civil liability resulting from actsperformed by judges in their discretionary judicial capacity isrecognized in the State of Texas, andwill be applied unless a judge acts solely inaministerial capacity. (2)Pursuant to Subsection (b)of Section 7ofArticle 668733,Vernon's Civil Statutes, neither a county judge norhis bondsman is liable for any subsequent negligence orwilful misconduct of the operation of amotor vehicle by any minor under the age of eighteen years if they have signed theminor's application for a driver's license. (3)The act of signing an under-eighteen minor's application for a'driver's license is a discretionary judicial function of a county judge, and isnot aministerial act.

-5738-. .

Hon. Cecil M. Pruett, page 9, (M-1174)

(4)Fifteen year old minors applying for a driver's license pursuant to Subsection (d)of Section 12 ofArticle 6687b must also have the signature of one of the persons enumerated in Subsection (b)of Section 7when they apply for a driver's license. Vejq truly yours,

CRAWBjbRDC.MARTIN Att ney General of Texas Prepared byAustin C. Bray, Jr. Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE
Kerns Taylor, Chairman W. E.Allen, Co-Chairman Bob Gauss Roger Tyler Sally Phillips John P.Traylor
SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL Staff Legal Assistant
ALFRED WALKER Executive Assistant
NOLA WHITE First Assistant

-5739-