Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
Honorable Robert F. Poden, Jr.
GOWity AttOXnsy
Matae;orda County
3ay city, Tsxaa
Dear SLr:
r YOU i6tt0r 0r tbiu department T said foaQts.w la or vwmn*8 Annotated ding aeven thouaand (VOW) uoh vehiolo or train or oom- than 8i.x hundred (600) pounds PSP welght lnoh width of tire upon any whoa1 aonomitrated upon the eurr800 Of the yehlmq shedi be op- erated on the public hi.~ ways outside *2 gononbla Rotart F. Pedan, Jr., Faga 2
llmite of en incorporated city or town; pro- vfded, however, the provisiona ct this section shall not become affective until the Cl.lz; day of Janusry, 1932.w (Undarraortng
The terms *blghway” and “public hi&hway” have bean defined by &atuta a8 follows: wTh8 tam0 ‘hl&hrey* aa ured thle Act
shall iaalude any publia road or thoroughfare thereof ana any bridge, oulvart or rectioa other aeceesary structure appertaining thereto.” (Aots 1925, 30th Lee., oh. 188, p. 456, Art.
6674a. V.A.C.S.)
“‘Fublia Highway’ shall inolude any road, street, way, thoroughfare or bridge in this for State not privately owrmd or controlled the use of vahl.cles over which the State has leglelatl~e jurlsdlotlon under ite polloe power. - (Act8 1929, 41 Leg., 2nd C.S., p. 1713, oh. 88, 880. 1, es emended Aatr 1930, 4lat Leg., 5th C.S., p. 151, oh. 23, sso. 1, xrt. 5575a-1, V.A.C.S.) in the 8arm man-
our courtu have derinad these terms aer. Railwsy 00. v. MontgomarJ, 83 Tax. 54, 19 8. w’. 1013i City of Dublin v. Barret (C.C.A.) 242 6. w. 535; and a woounty is a -public hlgbway:~ 21 Tex. Jur. 528-330. road*
It remains for us to determine who has the authority, or, more aocurately, duty, to weigh VahiCleu to datarmlae whath- ia a compliance with Sootion 5 ot Article B27a of VaP- non’s Annotated Penal Code. ~~~a have aaraiully examined pro- visions or Title 93 or Chapter 6 or the Rsvised civil Statute, Al'tiOl4U l047, et B4q. of the Penal Coda relating Tub- l$o welgharsw oan discover no such authority given those Individuals. As far as v;e oan determine the Statute8 relating to public wetgharr attempt tc do no more then regulate the busina60 or those angaging fn thst cccup4tloa for hire. Xa- deed, saotlon 6 of Artiola 827a, Vernon's Annotated Fanal Code s~a~lfically enjoin6 upon licenee and watght inspaotora State mghwsy Department the duty to determine acmplianaa with load limit Zen in the f’ollowing languagar L
Roamable Robert 1. Potion, Jr., Pago s
“SOO. 6. Any llaonae and wolght lnepeotor hating reaeon of the State Blghway Uepartmmt, to believe that the gross weight of a loaded vehicle ie uulawfUl, 1s aut&orized to tilghthe by mean8 of portable or statioaary same either males, and to require 'auoh rehiole be &riven to the ararettt roalee in the event euoh The llupeotar .mw lsoalee are within two mller.
then require thd driver or operetor to unload Wtuedletelg suoh portion OS load ao mey be bsorease groaa weight of suoh nsoeseary vehiole to the maxlmum grorr weight 8proltled by thlr Act."
Conatrolng thla rtatute, this depertmeat hold euoh llooa~r weight lnrpmotorr Opinion No. O-1454 that onl or the State Righway DePar ant have authority to walgh veblolee to determine rhetber not them ia an unlawful load, an- of eoales to drive thorlty to require those dthia two rller that ordlnuy pee00 offlour to them. we hold have no akoh au- thorlty. A:?OOQr Of thi8 opinion i8 enoloaed herewith. For the fmac~na given in Opinion t?o. O-1454 aad under. tbm authorities there olted It lo our opinion and pa ara ad- pub& wolgher has no authority vised that a oertifled to wei@ oountp roadr of Wtagorda Oounty to vehlolea apon the piblio deteraiae whethor i8 a~oompZ%anco with Seotion 5 of Ar- tlole 8270 of Vernon*a Anaotatod Penal Oodo, unle~r nquerted to do 60 by the driver or'owner of the vehlole. A IeNTl- ”
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Areietant