Tarrant County v. Roberts

374 S.W.2d 695, 1964 Tex. App. LEXIS 2215
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 9, 1964
DocketNo. 1
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 374 S.W.2d 695 (Tarrant County v. Roberts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tarrant County v. Roberts, 374 S.W.2d 695, 1964 Tex. App. LEXIS 2215 (Tex. Ct. App. 1964).

Opinion

DUNAGAN, Chief Justice.

Appellees, five employees or appointive officers of Tarrant County, filed a class suit in behalf of themselves and all employees and appointive officers of the county, praying in effect, for a declaratory judgment requiring and obligating the county of Tar-rant to establish and put into effect a retirement, disability and death compensation fund in accordance with the provisions of Article 16, Sec. 62, para, (b) of the Constitution of Texas, Vernon’s Ann.St. Upon the trial before the court without the intervention of a jury, the trial court rendered judgment for appellees' (plaintiffs in the court below) requiring and obligating appellants to establish and put into effect such retirement, disability and death compensation fund. The appellants have brought forward two assignments of error.

ASSIGNMENT NO. 1

The trial court erred in rendering judgment for appellees since everything required by law to create an obligation on the part of Tarrant County and its Commissioners [696]*696Court to put “into effect such retirement, disability and death compensation fund for its appointive officers and employees has not been done.”

ASSIGNMENT NO. 2

The trial court erred in rendering judgment for appellees since the County Commissioners of Tarrant County are not under any obligation to put such a plan into effect.

The trial court’s finding of facts as set out in its judgment is as follows: .

“1. The Commissioners Court of Tarrant County, by order in 1951, duly and' timely called for an election in Tarrant County on the proposition'of providing for and administering a Retirement, Disability and Death Compensation Fund for its appointive officers and employees:
“2. Such election was advertised by being published in at least one newspaper of general circulation in Tarrant County once each week for at, least four weeks.
“3. The voters of Tarrant County, in November 1951, by majority vote, authorized Tarrant County to provide for and administer a Retirement, Disability, and Death Compensation Fund for the appointive officers and employees of Tarrant County.
“4. The County Commissioners of Tarrant County duly canvassed such election returns on November 15, 1951, and by order of said date declared said proposition to have carried by a majority vote and further declared such proposition to be in full force and effect.
“5. Said order of November 15, 1951, by the Commissioners Court of Tarrant County has never been rescinded revoked, canceled, or amended.
“6. The term of court at which said order was entered has passed.
“7. Said order and said proposition' have never been carried out or put into effect by the Commissioners Court of Tarrant County.
“8. A majority of the members of the Commissioners Court of Tarrant County have taken and do now take the position that the putting into effect of such a plan is merely discretionary with them and that the Commissioners Court is not under any obligation to put such a plan into effect. * * * ”

The trial court also found that “The Commissioners of Tarrant County are under a legal duty*to put such a plan into effect.”

This lawsuit is based upon Article 16, Section 62, para, (b) of the Constitution of the State of Texas which reads as follows:

“(b) Each county shall have the right to provide for and administer a Retirement, Disability and Death Compensation Fund for the appointive officers and employees of the county; provided same is authorized by a majority vote of the qualified voters of such county and after such election has been advertised by being published in at least one newspaper of general circulation in said county once each week for four consecutive weeks; provided that the amount contributed by the county to such Fund shall equal the amount paid for the same purpose from the income of each such person, and shall not exceed at any time five per centum (5%) of the compensation paid to each such person by the county, and shall in no one year exceed the sum of One Hundred and Eighty Dollars ($180) for any such person.” (Emphasis supplied)

The voters of Tarrant County in November, 1951, by a majority vote, authorized Tarrant County to provide for and administer a Retirement, Disability and Death Compensation Fund for the appointive officers and employees of Tarrant County. The [697]*697official ballot in said election concerning the question before the court is as follows:

“Shall Tarrant County have the right to provide for and administer a retirement, disability and death compensation fund for the appointive officers and employees of the County; the amount contributed by the County to such fund to be equal to the amount paid for the same purpose from the income of each such person and shall not exceed at any time five (5%) per cent of the compensation paid to each such person by the County and shall in no year exceed the sum of one hundred eighty ($180.00) dollars to be paid by each such person?
“FOR Authorizing Tarrant County to provide for and administer a retirement, disability and death compensation fund for the appointive officers and employees of Tarrant County.
“AGAINST Authorizing Tarrant County to provide for and administer a retirement, disability and death compensation fund for the appointive officers and employees of Tarrant County.”

The Minutes of the Commissioner’s Court, regular term, November, A.D., 1951, in regular meeting the 15th day of November, A.D., 1951, met, canvassed the election returns and the results thereof declared. The first paragraph of said order reads:

“On this the 15th day of November, 1951, came on for consideration by the Court, the matter of canvassing the election returns of the election held on November 13th, 1951, upon five proposed Constitutional Amendments to the Constitution of the State of Texas, and upon two propositions affecting Tarrant County alone. And it appearing to the Court that the notices required by law were duly given, and that the election appeared to have been held in conformity with law, the Court proceeded to canvass the election returns and to announce the results as follows
The order further reads:
“On the proposition of giving Tar-rant County the right to provide for and administer a retirement, disability and death compensation fund for the appointive officers and employees of the County, the amount contributed by the County to such fund to be equal to the amount paid for the same purpose from the income of each such person and shall not exceed at any time five (5%) per cent of the compensation paid to each such person by the county shall in no year exceed the sum? of One Hundred Eighty ($180.00) Dollars to be paid by such person. 4,065 votes for, and 3,843 votes against.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lovett v. County of Harris
462 S.W.2d 405 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
374 S.W.2d 695, 1964 Tex. App. LEXIS 2215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tarrant-county-v-roberts-texapp-1964.