Case Information
*1 Ron. Clayton Bray opinion Ho. v-301 County Attorney Sutton Couuty Sonora, Texss
Rex Reconsideration of opinions o-178 and o-7011,, relative to use of cowthouae space by abstract firms in light of subsequent court decisions and the submitted facts.
Dear Sir:
Your request for au opinion of this office i.8 aubatantlally es pollovs:
“your opinion 0-178~ and ,o-7011, la- valving the use of offices in the Court- house, vas called to the attention of the 4o~sal~n~s' Cowt of this county and
they decided, In vi&f of Tarpant County v. Rettlkln Title Co., 1% 9. U. 2nd 269, vhlch vas dsted later thau your opinions, that, although they could not collect rent therefor, they could allocate to the County Clerk the office apace formerly uaed and rented to the only abstract com- pany in the ooUuty for copying space by all abstract companies. As a result,' the abstract oon@any still uses the same of- fice exclueivelg, keeps It locked when not Ia actual use, and maintains an of- fice directory sign in the rotunda of the courthouse advertising their ~looation &nd the sales of Insurance, but nov pays no rent. Buch abstraot company maintains no other office and conducts all business the?+e, both abstract and Insurance, and maintains a private telephone. Al.1 of thle I believe is contrapy to the Rattl- kin case and, too, our County Clerk has sufficient office space to permit the
, *2 s [*] [*] Hon. Cla$ton Brag - Page 2, V-301
copylz$ of records in the regular office a . 0
In Opinion 1yo. o-178, rendered cm February 25, 1939, this department statedt
“It is a matteD of common lulovledge~ that a courthouse ia designed for public use and no one shouLU be allowed, Or pep- mitted, to occupy it exoepC the pub110 of- flclals named In the statutev”
opinion No. v-7oll, of this 6epaPtdmnt dated Ja~uaxy 25, 1946, in support’ of Opinion No. O-174, stat- ear
“We know of. 90 aataarity i& the Con- mlsaloners' Court to expend cmn8y ZuuQa for office equipment end supplies to be used ftr purposes 0tWr than County pur- poses.
,
“Vhe~ court fialceu w,dieisrl’ knovledge of the fact t&t vi& tie mouth and accum- ulation of the public p@$@ord~ the &bs&&ot companies are a netseasmy IguiZUMnt of modern busine&m l&f% szrd, &e thPuns8lVeS a- gentti of the public WhU’ waaabe srird ,copp the Peoords as &@&a of the fIHJLtvidt~11 membera of the publlo.Wl;eP receiv%ng orders far the prepardW.on of’ w~&bstPact.
“‘The Court fuWheP takes .guiWisl no- tice that it h&a qevep been %he 6ustO&a in any county in thiti tltetie POP the’Qounta to exact ~‘POPL the abst?wa$ oolapsnies~ ~Wdi% reasonable 1.186 of the public reowda either rent OP fees in the gu%sb of PeKll~ POP the to have aocess to lpnd to *peat 81~8 right copy the sam6, aa was well known to the plaintiff at the time the .defen&ant and the other sbstmct coHIpani~i3 went into business and made plant lnveatmnts.’
. ,.
Bon. Clayton Bray - Page:31 V-301
.(. The court, in passing upon the Rattikin cas4, aupra, stated that inasmuch as the question presented ,vIa naw to our jurisprudence they would adopt the law of 8 foreign at+te amounceU In a Tenneaa4e case, Shelby County v. &mphia Abstract Co., 203 9. W. 339, as the l&w in Texaas: an& vhich is in part a8 follovs: . . "We is11 to find any statutory power
grauted to the quarterly county court or to the couuty commlaaionera of Shelby County to lease any part cif the: apaae in the offices dealgnatbd for the uae of county Officials, and ve think it la eleax.?@tit 80 au&i author- ity data. The pow4r,-if e*a$ent, on exer- cise vould,ulve the leaaee.tha =iRht to con- tml the apace leased to himpr 1% to the : ekcluaion of other me&era of the.~~io, and
the leases cotid be mul V-III p:
the serious &nbarraaament~~f othem whose ,I;lghtb to use the reglatryrooma ,+nd equip- *ntcaq0tbe denied. ,. .~. ..A ..~. ~1.,,, .'lp the ~abaen~e'oi.~r~~tl;tosyauthorlty
‘,. no part of the rmiwi~ln~~t@&nt,~use as a registry of deeds and a% @rt~~of~~a,courthouae : I)~J be leased to be~ua&~fo~..~.~eriod of
months or yeas8 for p*dvate~-putl?~ea~~.~~~t~ bulldings and the& equlgau4I3t~.are~ppb3.iC pro- perty held by the county, but in tzust for the public use. 7 B+C.L. p. 948;'gtate v.
xiaxt, 144 zIpa. 107, 43 H~.E. --i++, 33 L.R.A, 118, and note; 'i34c.3tur~v. Delrslb~~.Coqnty, 130 Qa.
488, 61 S.H. 23."
A county h.$a no power to le&ae,itrr property to private persons ln t+ abaenc4 of a oonatitut+nal y?r it8tut.o~ pewvlaleti~~ kpreaaly Q1" iaplladly authoril;lpg *4 E&in. Clayton Way - Page 4, V-301
it t0 a0 60. The Bounty Wldlngs are public prcsperty hela by the county, but in trust for the public use, and a board of commlssloneFs has no power, unless ex- p*esaly delegated to it, to allow such property to be used for any but 8 public purpoge. (14 Am. Jup. p. 208)
The law does not contemplate the use of the o@uuty aourthousa for office space for private purposes. fn your request yau state that the abe%ract company mattntalna no other office but cotadwta its abatraot and ~Znsuranee bueineas in an offlae furnished in the county caurthouce bf Sutton Cotuity. It is oaly incumbent upon the county to $u??nlsh sufficdent space for record copy- %.. (Art. 1945, V.C.3,) ;tt is assumed that the offloe a? ~County Olerk of Sutton County has sufffia.eat offlge space to permit the copying of receMs in the aw ,afar office, and that the .same does not interfere wit er the business of said office. This being true, it ta the opinion of Chla Department that tbie w~ulcX meet the Pe- eb the law. In the case ol Park%nt County V. " qUrremen0 Rattlkln !B%tla Co., supra, there Was no cl&n as to the excludve use of the space allotted nor was there any ala&m that the appellee demanded mope privileges than any ot&@ oltlsen; whereas, in your case, the space al- lotted ia ezclsaive. To warpant the Commlsalone~at htlS.‘t in 8Uthol’iZing the U84 Qf the @dffiC6 ia qU46tim far Q@IIJI~~ space, it must be qhoWn th#it it i# Z&68%- ti4 efflce of County CZerlt te expixxxd $0 oa;M, easy fop fer the voWme of basinasa. But to hme auffits%ent spmg vitill;Ln the ofXIes of the County Clerk to 04x5 fQI: She r%asands OS those desldng to inspa& aab cop ra- cads bnd at the sa&e t+as @ant irXolvalvar u&e 0 f tha MX%a% aga;~e vlthln the Cmrtbeuae to a;n &atNmt u%@- pamy wrMkd sot ?m Wtrc~anmtad. In vlev OP the Z&w dLn- n@amped iq the Taiwnt ti%bxtafidr case, azxd ,%W $Pats s,ub- n;5t%ied, dt Ir the op&tion of this I)egarQwW4t Wt *a 4rolualve usbe of MX?.ae space In @a6 SU8t~ OCWi8y catr74tfiU$8e tiy eip a~!&%?iW6t OO!@pSZy Wit&d ZW,t b6 &%%tb& buo* &a Gtbliwia#$aners’ Goupt ma all08 @MI%-
$i$onal offioes to the CWnty %,~k, if needed, 1’ fern fmmishlq spasaoe to %he genepal p@iLLa tza, %mapect and w r4~oz?d8, but Solely not gr&M epac~e in f&* cdunty ooukthovse to an abstrW3t company for an offioe itswblah to con&et its
. . .
Bon, Clayton Bray - Page 5, V-301
.
business' to the exclusion of all others.
Yours very truly ATTOFNEGENERALOF TEXAS BW:jt;vb;djm .
. .’ :.
,i : . . ~”
.,
” [*]
. . [3]