*1 OFFICE ,OF THE ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

Honorable M. I". Kleke

@m.~ty Attorney

&Be County

f3lddlxlg8, Texas

en reoeivea and oardully coneld6reQ I we request ar rol- loml I'

Law had been salary fxml on being advised that .L nal, I a0 advised I” !I:,. The Gentwl.sriaaer~e not app& the aoimunt. The or then sued ths~Com&seioasr~8 t in form of aertionarl to n of the Cornmiselonar*e CourB. devolved around the oonatitu- a Statute and the Comnieaionerts aourt did not care to hurt the offleerts dxmd- ing, he aonaented to bringing this euit agalnat the county, to have the matter adjudleatsd. "In a trial In the Diatrlot Court, I, ae County Attorney, represented the county, TM *2 court held thCit the UOlZTi,&S,3iOneX"6 DiBtriCt court haQ improperly rejected one or two small.er items a6 exprrnee 0r offiae, but

held that it ha~properlp acted on the

rmttsr of the $4,000.00 salary. (I am

attaching a copy of the judgment.)

Vha Officer gave notice of appeal, but later paid into the.oounty treasury

approximately ~l,OOO.OO, representing the

rmney which WAS due the County titer the

oourt held the Special Law raising him

sale ry unoonstitutional .

Wndsr the oiroumatance~, am I en- titled to the 10% provided for in Article

@5i3i3,p"r the 1925 Rdvlesll Civil statutee of

e

"In your opi,nion No. O-665 you seem to Indloato that I am. In your Optnion o-24lO

,JWU ho18 that it ie necessary that mit

must be brought& In the lnatant cabe a suit rias brought, although, under the ciroumstances, by agreement, it 'RIB inetituteQ by the Offi-

cer. Xt is my o&nion that in the fors- the requirement of Art. 339

:going aituatlon which eLatea 'Bs ahall institute suah pro-

ossdingn as eye nsoassary to ao*l the

performance of auoh dutiee - et *9s met by

a suit, althcugh not filed by me."