Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1941
Status
Published
On the bench
Gerald Mann
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

AUSTIN

IQ.‘. 060. A. Hlght

Chief Aoaountant

Board of Oounty and Dlstrlot Iso84 In

Auatin, Texas

Dear Sirr

V

Boar& or County

oI$d;;t;dny )

I) 0r t&tL

trlot #18 l llglble

on on authority 0r

rdsr entered by the

ommlrrlon January

your letter 0r ;~anu~~ 87,

roqu*,rtlng our opinion a~

*pm tuao order the road

tone County, een be pad8

fundr sllooated to the

fndrbtadmrr ror the ra-

County Boa& Dlrtrlot No. 18 leeuoil

5&s Bond* date4 July 15, 1919 ana

d proaeedr in the aonetruotlon of a

art to Ben Hur, to Ckror8be0k. After

the oompletlon of the road various lntararted

group8 appeared barore the Highway Corrmlrllloa

rr0a1 .rhe to time in an 0rr0rt to ham th0 road

de8lglutrd. *

*On Augu8tl4, 1933 the Highmy Comml8don p68-

WI the fOilOWing &!bUtO NO. 7997 I

..--- . . . . .1....-.*a-.. a. *^.” ““ycl~,,l” . . . n .“.“. ycy”., ^“,“,^” ..” . . . . .““.“““^“““y” .” _^“. .““^“..“-.. - -*.--* .--.--..-

Mr. Gee. A. Bight, page #2

State Hi&way Ho. 164

WAuRuat 14, 1933 - Ulnuta 7991 In MoLennan

and hneatono Countlea it la ordered by tha aom-

miaalon that applioatlon ror daafgnatfon rmm

Oroeabeok to Mart be granted on oondltion that

oountlea affected will furnish not leas than loo*

right-of-way on looatlon to be approved by tha

State Highway Engineer, and on further condition

that MoLennan County will oonatruot, at its own

coat, on the approved looatlon, a 20’ road rrom

Hy.#6 to the Limeatone County line, and with tha

further understanding that the Hwy. Dept. will

make the looatlon to Oroesbaok but will not oon-

atruat aaid road until funds are availabla.

“‘In oomplianoe with the above Minute, the en-

gineering ataff or tha Hw. Dept. looataa a road

rrom Mart to Groesbeok on an entirely new looa-

tlon and requested the County to furnish deed8

to the right-of-way, whfoh they did, end the High-

way Dept. prooeaded wlth the oonatruotlon or the

base and drainage etruoturss.

*i7’ollowing the anaotmant or House Bill 688 Lime-

atone County riled e olEilm ror expense lnourred in

the aonatruotlon of the old looatlon which ran rrom

Mart to Ben Hur, to Oroaabaok. This olaim uaa da-

riled on the grounds that the old looatlon waa not

a designated Highway. The County than aeoured

letters from Mr. D. K. Martin end Ur. John Wood,

members or the Highway Commlasion at the tlma

Minute No. 7997 was paaaed, (ooplea attached),

and other supporting data whloh they presentad

to the Highway Commiaalon in the applloetlon for

a Nuno Pro Tuno order.

*On January 13, 1941 applloatlon for Nun0 Pro

‘pun0 order waa heard and the following order was

paaaed aa 0r that date:

Mr. 000. A. Right, page 83

” lWITEXEAS,Honorable Carl Cannon, County Judge,

Limestone County, Soott Reed, 2. L. Connally, end

Wesa Popejog, ‘County Ooxnlasloner, Preolnot No. 3,

Llnestone County, appearing in behalf of Llmeetoru

County, represent to this Cornmlaalon that on August

14, 1933, the old road rxtendlng rrom Kart to GWa-

beok rle Ben Hut in Llmeatone County, was by Klnuta

No. 7997 designated as e highway on the road 8Jrstam

or the State1 and

* WHEREAS,It la further represents& to this Com-

mlaalon that direction, warning, and other signs.: ”

and amrkara wera ereoted and maintained upon the

said highway by the Nlghwey Departmant; and

* WRZ%AS, in a letter rrom Honorable John Wood,

Chairman or ths Hlgbway Commlaalon la 1933, to Hon-

orable Carl Cannon, dated June 21, 1940, Kr. Xood

states t&it it was hla lntantion end the t ho felt

sure it was the intention or all Llembera or the

Highway Commlaalon to d68lgnata the old mad rmm

Mart to Grocabeok via Ben Hur at the tlma Allnute

No. 7997 was parsed; and

* WHEREAS Honorable D. iC. Kartln who was a r*mbar

or ths @al& ~oxulaalon et that time, l&a letter to

Honorable W.A,Keellng, dated Cotober 21, 1940, stated

that in the passage or Llinute Nor 7997 on AUuguSt 14,

1933, it waa hi8 intention that the old road rrom

Mart to Groesbeok via Ban Hur be da@lgnatOd es a

state Highway; and

” -yiiE;mAs, it rurthar appears that Unute No. 7997,

parsed by the Comutlaslon on Au&uSt 14, 1933, mar hare

been oonatrued by the Highway Departsmnt to bs tha

designation of a new highmy on a new looatlon between

&art and Grossbeck and not as a deslgnatlon Or the then

axlatlng road; and

409

Yrr Gao. A. Bight, pegs #4

a WEFXAS, alno 8 such time the right a or no

other part108 hare lntsrrsnad;

* TEEREFORE, to oorraot auoh error so that

the reoorde of this body my olcarly reflect the

truth or the matters lnrolr8d;

)1 IT IS ORDERrsD TFiAT it was the d8olarad ln-

tentlon and purpose of the Commlaslon as then

constituted, by the piaaage or Ulnute No. 7997

on August 14, 1933, to d88lgnatO tha old road

from Xart to Groeabeok vie Ben Hur as a pnrt of

the State Highway System;

w BE IT FURTXUi CiRDERED THAT Such intention

or dealgnatlon or auoh mad by the passage or

yinuta No. 7997, and this order deolarlng auoh

intention, ba entered upon the minutsa ci this

Commission, nuno pro tuna, as of AuguSt 14, 1933,

end es so enterad shall be as erfaotlvs aa it

thla olerlrloatlon end expreaalon of intention

had actually been enterad on Nob mlnutea on the

data lsst mentlonrd abora.

* I, Ii. L. Wlglnton, Seoratary oi the State

Highway Comlealon of Texas do hereby oartlfy

that the above aad rorrgolng la a true and oor-

raot oopy or Unute:’ parsed on January 13, 1941,

as the same appsara or record in the r8oozda or

Orrlalal Mnutea or the Stata Highway Comlaalon

of Tfgxaa.

c Witness my hand end orflolal real thlr 14th

day or Januery, 1941.

(signed) M.L.Wlglnton,Seoretary

Texas Highway COsarA88lOn’

410

Mr. Gee. A. Hi&t, page 85

* Pleaseadvise this Board whether or not under

the pxuvlalona of House Bill 688 and the authority

or the above Nuno Pro Tuna order LlmStona County

Road Dlstrlot No. 18 Bonds dated July lb, 1919 are

rllglble ror participation.*

The authorities of this jurlsdlotlon end those or

other States present a solid rront 0r uniformity as to the

orfiae or a nuno pro tuna order. Of oourae the authorltlaa

hereinaSter olted refer to oourts, but we know or no raaaon

why the spplloatlon to oourta should be any more reatrlotad

than to boards or oommlaalona created by statute. In the

lnatant nattcr we think the rules and authorltlea goorornlng

the ofSloe OS a nuno pro tuna order are equally as epplloabla

to the Highrmy Comtulaalon as to the judlolary.

Literally, now for then.

“nun0 pro tuna* means m-m Its

orfloe is not to make an order now ror then but to enter now

ror then an order Fravloualy m&e. In the case of Gulf Colo-

rado E Santa Fe Ry. CO., v. Rarity, 285 S. K. 296, the oourt

Sal&t

“An entry *nun0 pro tuna’ preauppoaaa a

judgment actually rendered by the oourt but

not 8ntsrad by the clerk.’

A nuno pro tuna entry 1s one nade now of something

whloh was aotually previously done, to have effeot es of the

rormbr tlata . Its orrloe la not to supply omlttad aotlon by

the oourt but to supply an omission sotually had but omitted

through inadvertence or mistake. The following oaaea Unl-

iormly announce thio principle: Perkim Y. Hay@erd, 31 K.E.

6701 Sern v, Sample, 206 N. $7, 832; Marker Y. Glllam, 196

Pao. 126; Cannon Y. Oklahoma Engraving k Printing CO., 249

Pao. 300.

A nun0 pro tune entry oan only be ma8 upon ma-08

f~nl@hed by the papers end filed. ln the oeu88, or 8omethltU.X

>.-

.

411

Mr. Gee. A. Hi&d, pge #4

or reaord, or in the minute book or judgecn dooket, na a

be810 to emend by. The rteno~apher*a notcr or prooeedlngr

in an aotion 40 not constitute a paper on file in the oau8e

which oan be mad6 the bar18 or an amendment or a judgw?mt

nun0 pro tuno. See cam of Beoher v* Deu8e1, 49 S. c'. 34Sr

&fKE E Ry. Co, tr HOl8OhLeg, 45 8. W. 1lOl;~Young 7. Young,

45 s. W. 1014.

In the recent oaee of Arrlngton et al '1. EoDenlel

et al., B5 S. W. (Bd) 295, by the COlCIEiB8iOll of Appeal8, Seo-

tion A, oplnlon adopted by the Suprbme Court of the State of

Tax88, we find this statement:

WAnune pro tuno order attempting to oorreot

or amend a judiolsl ni8take and not a mere olerl-

oal error or mi8take in entry of Judgment would

br unauthorltid and beyond power oi court to

enter.a

This 8ame prlnolple rinds approval in the Oe8e8 or

Burnri4e t* Wand, 71 S. ii. 557; Wllmerrblng V. Corbla Banking

co. ) es so. 440.

The purpoee of a nuno pro tuna entry or order an4

it8 only legltlmate rumti0n i8 to oorrsotly etldenoe UpOn

the reoord ot the eeurt a judgment, deoree or order eotually

made by it, but Milch ror come reaeon ha8 not been intered

of reoord at the proper time. The Blnmgan Brown Compenp V.

;;ybar, 19Z 9. W, e44, and tfueginr v. Johnrton, 4 8. W. (S4)

.

A oarerul etudg 0r the aotlon 0r the Hlghwaf Coamlr-

8ibn On AUgU8t 14, 1933, wherein ihUt 87997 w88 adopted an4

the rtepr taken pursuent to that b;lnute, when taken in o~~eo-

tion with the notion of the Highway Comciaaion on January 13,

1941, wherein said nuno pro tuna order was adopted, leed8 U8

to the oonoluelon that laid order 18 an attrmpt to oorreot

or omen4 Mnute 87997, adbpted on duguust 14, 1933, and under

the authority ot the oe8e above quoted, Arrlngton et al to

&oDenlel, es S. W. (e4) 895, 8uoh order would be lnerreotlre

to aaooqli8h it8 objeot.

.

Xr. Gee. A. Hlght, page #O

Your attention i8 direoted to that portion of th8

nun0 pro two order whloh reta a8 rOlhW8l

*ft le ordered tbt it wae the declared In-

tention end purpoee Or the Commle8lon (I8 then

OOn8tltuttd bg the passage cb Mnute #7997 on

August 14, 1933, to designate the old road tmm

Mart to Oroesbeck via Ben Hur as a prt or the

State Hlghwag Sgstem;m

We do not think the above quote4 portion or 8al4

nun0 pro tuna order aurrlolent to teke it out or the above

olted authorities. It oleerly appears from a readlna or

tinUte 17997, eitd the letter8 of the lOrmr Comls8loner8,

that at the beat they only intended to derrignate said roe4

a8 a State Highway, but there 18 no finding to the erfeot

t&t Bald road aotuellg was deelgnated end t&it through

error the Wnute did not BO rerleot.

The rtepr teken by the englnbsrlng 8tarr or the High-

rray Departmnt pursuant to Mnute #799'P, a8 well e8 thO8e

taken by the county in furnishing deed8 to the right-of-way

,on en entirely different looatlon Ieem plainly oppO8e4 to the

oonolurrlon that Minute .#7997 dl4 not repreeent the jud@nent

end order or the Coacnl88lon et thet time. An enomelou8 8ltue-

tion would have been presented had the Coinmlraion dt8i&!ltttd

the road from Gfleebeok tla Ben HUr to Mert a8 a State Blgh-

my, and then prooeede& to expend large 8uum of money on

another looetlon in oonatruoting a bare and drelneqe 8taO-

ture rollowlnd the oounty'8 ruanlshlng to the State de448 to

the right-of-war on the new looetion. The action of the county

in rurnlehlng the deeds to the right-or-way on the looatlon

seleoted and approved by the State Highway Engineer pur8uent

to V.nute #7997 justlrles the aonoluelon thet the oounty lnter-

preted thin order of the iiighwey Commlaslon to menn nothing

nmre nor lees than that the highway whioh they had sought wall

to be the one conatruoted on right-of-way furnished by it. fn

Other worda, we must aonolude that the order entered by the

COEUd88iOn - that la, Minute #7997 - oleerly reprerented the

judgment or the comnl88lon at that time snd that an lnt6ntlon

to have done otherwise oennot oonetitute the bael8 Of an arand-

ment to be entered et this time nun0 pro tune.

* -

413

kr. Geo. A. Bight, page #g

Replying to your quesltion, we sdvlae that In our

opinion Limestone County Road Dlsttriot #18 bond8, dated

July 13, 1919, the prooeed8 or vhloh were expended in the

ootmtruotlon or the old ma4 running from Groerrbeok Yie

Ben Bur to Lart are not eligible ior pertlol~tlon in the

fun48 eoorulng to the Bcmrd of County and Dlstrlot Road

Indebtednear, under the prorlrlonr of H. 8. 488. Of oour8e

we reaoh tblr oonolusloa by reelon of our determination that

the nuno pro tuna order entered by the Highrmg Commleelon on

January 13, 1941, 18 inefrectuel and oannot legally eaoom-

pll8h en amendment of Einute #7997 adopted by the Highway

Commi88lon on August 14, 1933.

Your attention 18 relrpeotfully dlreoted to our opln-

ion Nmber 0-194e, addressed to Mr. 0. A. Hlght, Chief AO-

oountant, Board cf County and Dl8trlot Roe4 Indebtedne88,

wherein it we8 oonaluded that no road oould becom a pert

or the State Highwey System until sme hRd betn formlly

taken over for malntemnoe purposee by the Highwar Depart-

ment, and t&et until suoh event the Boerd was not euthor-

lae4 to make the bon48 Ireus thereror ellglble ror pertl-

olpetlon in the funde eoorulng to the Bomb. AOOOrdlngl~,

it mu8t be eel6 that even e8eumlng the nun0 pro tuna order

above mentioned oould effeotlvely amend the prlglnel tinute8,

the Board would be under the duty to eeoertefn the date OB

whloh euch road of-flolnlly end formally beoene e part of the

State Alghvay System before the bond8 could be mde ellglblo

for partlclpatlon, under the term8 of H, B. 400.

Truetlng that the loregodng fully anewem your ln-

qulry, we are

Very truly your8

APPROVEOm 26, 1941

A?T@RNP

Y o;:XLF4L CT TEXAS

1

ATTORNEY

GENERALOF TEXAS

Clarenoe E. Crowe

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.