Hon. Paul H. Brown 

Fire Insurance Commissioner 

Board of Insurance Commissioners 

815 Brazos 

Austin, Texas Opinion No. V-1425 

Re: Number of persons for whom 

travel expense funds have 

been appropriated to attend 

out-of-State meetings of 

the National Association of 

Dear Sir: Insurance Commissioners. 

You have requested the opinion of this office on the question of the legality of paying the 

expenses of more than three persons from current appropriations to the Insurance Department incurred 

while attending out-of-State meetings of the National 

Association of Insurance Commissioners. 

The Insurance Department has several travel 

;;ppszhap roprlations (H.B. 426 Acts 52nd Leg., R.S. 

h . [99$ p. 1228, at p. 1360 et seq.). The problem or decis on when personnel of the Insurance Department are traveling out of the State is the appllcabib 

ity of the following general limitation on oti+of-State 

travel: 

“d. No traveling expenses shall be 

incurred by any employee of any of the 

departments, or other agencies of the government, outside of the boundaries of the 

State of Texas, except for State business 

and no such expenses shall be paid from 

State appropriations or out of any local 

or auxiliary funds by the State Comptroller to an employee of any agency of the 

government until and unless a written 

statement, signed by the Attorney General, 

advising that the purpose of the proposed 

trip in his opinion, is for said Eiia;e 

business purposes; . . . J.n no e n 

shall more than three (31 oersons from any 
.-- 

Hon. Paul H. Brown, page 2 (V-1425) 

m (1) deoartment be aon o ed for 

travel to anv one (1) conie&ion or 

meeting of a similar nature.” Sec. 

;: ‘1 1" 36. 

Art. III, H.B. 426, supra, at 

(Emphasis added.) 

You state that the objects of the Association, and of their meetings, are: 

n n 0 e to promote uniformity in 

legislation affecting insurance; to 

encourage uniformity In departmental 

rulings under the insurance laws of 

the several states; to disseminate information of.value to insurance supervisory officials in the performance of 

their duties and to establish ways and 

means of fully protecting the interests of insurance policyholders of the 

various states, territories and insular 

possessions of the United States.” 

We assume, of course, that the proposed attendance of meetings of the National Association of 

Insurance Commissioners is in furtherance of State 

business. Therefore, the problem is limited to &etk 

this is a “convention or meeting of a similar nature.” 

If it is, the Legislature has appropriated travel expense money for only three persons. Att’y Gen. Op. 

v-1376 (192). 

The meetings you propose to attend are not 

“conventions” under the decisions of this office. It 

has been repeatedly held that the word llconvention’l 

as used by the Legislature in like appropriation bill 

limitation provisions refers to “a meeting of members 

or delegates of a private organization, party, club, 

society, or the like, for the accomplishment of some 

common object .‘I 

2664 (1940). 

Attly Gen. Ops. O-1737 (1939) and OFollowing the above decisions of this 

office holding 19meetlngs called by agencies of government for the purpose of accompli hing the functions 

of government imposed upon them” 9 not to be “conventions,” attendance of a meeting of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners is not attendance 

of a “converition.n 

JJ Opinion O-1737 (1939) 
Hon. Paul H. Brown, page 3 (V-1425) 

Thus, the question is narrowed to a determination of whether the meeting in question is a 

llmeetlng of a similar nature.” 

These words standing alone are not free 

from ambiguity, but it is obvious that the Legislature intended the words “meeting of a similar nature” 

~to enlarge the restriction which would have been imposed if only the single word “convention” had been 

used. It seems apparent that the Legislature sought 

expressly to embrace at least those meetings which 

might themselves have been considered to be “convenition were it not for the prior decisions of this 

office above cited. In other words, we believe the 

legislative intent In adding this phrase was to embrace meetings of organizations, whether adjuncts of 

governmental agencies or not, which are conducted in 

the form, manner, and method ascribed to %onventions” 

in common parlance. 

Webster’s New International Dictionary (2nd 

Ed. 1938) defines “similar” as follows: 

“1 . Nearly corresponding; resembling 

in many respects j somewhat like, having a 

general likeness.” 

In 39 Words and Phrases (Perm. Ed.) 302-306, 

several cases are cited construing the word U1similar’8 

appearing in contracts, wills, ordinances, and statutes, the general tenor of which is to accord the commonly accepted meaning to the term as distinguished 

from the term “identical.” These cases point out that 

unless the context indicates a more restricted meaning 

of the word “similar,” the generally accepted meaning 

as commonly used is the one that should be adopted. 

The context here requires, as has been pointed 

out above, that ~~conventions” and “meetings of a similar 

nature” be held not to be identical. Therefore, we are 

of the opinion that this added phrase was intended at 

least to cover formal meetings of organized groups that 

meet only for discussion, exchange of ideas, and dissemination of information. We cannot attempt to lay down 

a categorical definition as to what are “meetings of a 

similar nature ,‘I since we cannot foresee every character 

of gathering which may be brought into question and we 

cannot know what fact situation may be presented in the 

future. We are of the opinion, however, that meetings 
_ - 

Hon. Paul H. Brown, page 4 (v-1425) 

of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners are within the restriction, and travel expenses 

are appropriated for the travel of a maximum of 

three persons from the Insurance Department to any 

one of such meetings. 

SUMMARY 

Meetings of the National Association 

of Insurance Commissioners are not conventions .within the restrictions limiting 

out-of-State travel expense appropriations 

to three persons from one department to a 

"convention or meeting of a similar nature" 

(Sec. 12(d), Art. III, H.B, 426 Acts 52nd 

Leg e 

1436j, 

R-S. 1951 ch. 499, p. 1238, at pO 

but they'are "meetings of a similar 

nature'" j and there is a travel expense appropriation for a maximum of three persons 

from the Insurance Department to any of 

such meetings. 

APPROVED: 

C. K. Richards 

Trial Gc Appellate Division 

E. Jacobson 

Reviewing Assistant 

Charles D. Mathews 

First Assistant 

EWT:wb 

Yours very truly, 

PRICE D,ANIEL 

Attorney General 

By$k$+?‘$eho~ IA sistant