Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
KP-0141
| Tex. Att'y Gen. | Jul 2, 2017Background
- Texas Health & Safety Code ch. 574 governs court-ordered mental health services and requires proceedings be held in the county court (statutory or constitutional) that has probate-jurisdiction in mental illness matters.
- Section 574.0085(a) authorizes the "county judge" to appoint a full- or part-time associate judge to preside over those proceedings if the commissioners court authorizes the employment.
- Requestor (Bexar County Criminal District Attorney) asked whether "county judge" means (a) the commissioners court presiding officer (i.e., county commissioners court judge) or (b) the judge of the county court with probate/mental-illness jurisdiction.
- Texas law recognizes constitutional county courts (constitutional county judges also preside over commissioners court) and statutory county/probate courts; both judges are often called "county judge."
- The AG analyzed the text of § 574.008 and § 574.0085, related provisions (e.g., Gov’t Code subchapter C for statutory probate court associate judges), and predecessor statutes to determine legislative intent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who is the "county judge" under Tex. Health & Safety Code § 574.0085(a)? | The term refers to the presiding officer of the county commissioners court. | The term refers to the judge of the statutory or constitutional county court that has probate/mental-illness jurisdiction. | Court (AG opinion): "county judge" means the county court judge (statutory or constitutional) with jurisdiction over mental-illness matters, who appoints associate judges under § 574.0085(a). |
Key Cases Cited
- Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Adcock, 412 S.W.3d 492 (Tex. 2013) (statutory-construction principle: ascertain legislative intent)
- In re Office of the Att'y Gen., 456 S.W.3d 153 (Tex. 2015) (statutory text must be read in context)
- Jaster v. Comet II Constr., Inc., 438 S.W.3d 556 (Tex. 2014) (consider statute as a whole in construction)
- In re United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 307 S.W.3d 299 (Tex. 2010) (harmonize statutes with related laws where possible)
- City of Round Rock v. Rodriguez, 399 S.W.3d 130 (Tex. 2013) (presume Legislature acted with knowledge of background law)
- Tex. Pipe Line Co. v. Hunt, 228 S.W.2d 151 (Tex. 1950) (distinction between constitutional county courts and statutory county courts)
- In re L.L., 821 S.W.2d 247 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1991, writ denied) (prior interpretation involving transfer by the constitutional county court judge)