History
  • No items yet
midpage
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
MW-87
| Tex. Att'y Gen. | Jul 2, 1979
|
Check Treatment
Case Information

*1 The Attorney General of Texas November 21, 1979

MARK WHITE

Attorney General Opinion No. MW- 07

Honorable Ben Z. Grant, Chairman Judiciary Committee Re: Salaries of district attorneys.

House of Representatives P. 0. Box 2910

Austin, Texas 78769

Dear Representative Grant:

You have requested our opinion on the salary of district attorneys under section 3 of the ProfeasIonaI Prosecutors Act, article 332b-4, V.T.C.S. That section provides:

Sec. 3. Each district attorney governed by this Act shall receive from the state compensation equal to 90 percent of the compensation that iv provided for a district judge in the General Appropriations Act. Each commissioners court may supplement the dis- trict attorney’s state salary, but shnJl in no event pay the district attorney an amount less than the compensation it provides its highest paid district judge.

Your specific question is:

In computing a district attorney% supplementary salary, should the commissioners court include the compensation provided to a district judge for service on the Juvenile Board?

It is wall established that any compensation received by a judge for his service on the @menIle board is for services rendered as a judge. Jones v. Alexander, 59 S.W.2d 1080 (Tex. 1933); Attorney General Opinions Ii-461 ml23 0973). In Holland v. Harris County, 102 S.W.2d 196 (Tex. 19371, the court was required to determine the amount of salary due a special ludge. The special judge was entitled to the same pay as a district judge. The district juc&s received a supplement for their services on the juvenile board, but the special judge had no duties with regard to the juvenile board. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court held that the juvenile board compensation p. 265

Honorable Ben Z. Grant - Page Two (NW-87)

was for services as a judge and that it was required to be included in computing the pay due the special judge. But cf. Allen v. Davis, 333 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. Civ. App. - Amarillo 1960, writ ref’d n.r.e.1 (county court-at-law juee not entitled to additional compensation paid county judge for juvenile board service).

Accordingly, since compensation paid by a county to a district judge by virtue of his service on the juvenile board Is part of his compensation within the meaning of section 3 of article 332b-4, V.T.C.S., the amount must be included in determining the minimum supplement which may be paid the district attwneys.

SUMMARY In determining the minimum pay due district attorneys covered by the Professional Prosecutors Act, which supplements the district attorney’s salary, a county must include any supplement it pays district judges for service on tha juvenile boar& Attorney General of Texas JOHN W. FAINTER, JR.

First Assistant Attorney General

TED L. HARTLEY

Executive Assistant Attorney General

Prepared by C. Robert Heath

Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED:

OPINION COMMITTEE

C. Robert Heath, Chairman

Jim Allison

David B. Brooks

Walter Davis

Bob Gammage

Susan Garrison

Rick Gilpin

William G Reid

Bruce Y oungblood

p. 266

Case Details

Case Name: Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Court Name: Texas Attorney General Reports
Date Published: Jul 2, 1979
Docket Number: MW-87
Court Abbreviation: Tex. Att'y Gen.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.