Opinion No.
Background
- Texas Attorney General opinion discusses whether chapter 161 of the Local Government Code applies to the District Attorney of the 34th Judicial District and staff in El Paso County.
- Chapter 161 applies to a county that meets specific criteria and to a county public servant; El Paso County created a County Ethics Commission under chapter 161.
- Chapter 161 defines a county public servant to include certain county officers, employees, attorneys at law when performing governmental functions, and others.
- The question focuses on whether a district attorney can be subject to the county ethics code under the attorney-at-law provision when performing a county governmental function.
- Non-attorney staff of the district attorney are considered district employees, not county employees, and thus not subject to the county ethics code.
- The opinion concludes that the district attorney and his or her attorneys are subject to the El Paso County Code of Ethics when participating in a county governmental function; non-attorney staff are not.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| DA and attorneys subject to code when performing county function? | District Attorney's attorneys are attorneys at law performing governmental functions. | Only certain county public servants are covered; broad applicability may be limited. | Yes; DA and its attorneys are subject when performing county governmental functions. |
| Non-attorney DA staff subject to code? | Staff may be considered county employees in practice. | Staff are not attorneys and are employed by the DA, not the county. | No; non-attorney staff are not subject to the county code. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316 (Tex. 2009) (statutory interpretation and intent analysis)
- State v. Shwnake, 199 S.W.3d 279 (Tex. 2006) (statutory construction principles)
- Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Summers, 282 S.W.3d 433 (Tex. 2009) (plain meaning and absurd results exception)
- Fleming Foods of Tex., Inc. v. Rylander, 6 S.W.3d 278 (Tex. 1999) (statutory interpretation and context)
- City of Waco v. Kelley, 309 S.W.3d 536 (Tex. 2010) (contextual reading of statutory language)