Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1986 )


Menu:
  •                               The Attorney General of Texas
    ?d~wry        21, 1986
    Eonorablo     Srcpha C. Bovrrd                         Oplnloa 80.   Ju-439
    Orange     County Att,miq
    Courthowe                                              h?:    compllbnct vith etction 1A of
    Orange,     tcxbr           771630                     article   6701b. T.T.C.S..    and the
    diemissal    of charges
    Dear Xr. Itoward:
    Pou have asked about the appllcat5on     of etctlon 1A of articlt
    670lh. P.T.C.S., the safety rtsponsibUity    law, vhich provides thnr nc
    motor vehicle ms,, be operated In this state
    4824 Albbm AW, sunt ldo
    El P*so, TX 799052793                        unltst(I policy of automobile liabbilitg       Insurance
    DlY53MW
    In      st      ltnrt minfmum amounts to provide
    the
    evidence of ffnancial     responsibility     under this
    1001 Imar. suit* 700                         Act III in effect     to Insure      bgbinst   potential
    Nouslon.lx. 770023111                        loests vhich asp arise out of the operation of
    712l22NSm                                    that v tIhicle.
    P.T.C.S.      lrt.     6701h.        llA(b).
    The statute        further       provides:
    Sec..1B.  (a) On and after      January 1, 1982,
    UQO N. TtnIh. Suilt B
    MCAIhn. 7x. 78501-1655                       tvtq           andlor gptcbtor in the Start of Ttxat
    cmntr
    5r2iaws47                                    shall be required, as s condition         of driving,     to
    furnftrtr, upon rtqutst.      evidence      of financial
    rtsporwlbbllity to a lav tnforctmtnt       off%car of the
    200 Main Plaza. Suite ux)
    State of Tuar        or tn]r subdivision      thereof,    or
    Sm htonlo. TX. 792052797
    5m22E-419~
    agent of the Departcent,        or to another        person
    involmtd in an sccidtut.
    An Epual Oppwtunityl                             (b) The follwing        tvldtnct               of   f lnbncial
    Alllrmrtlrr Acllon Employs
    rcspoosib~lity   SbCi8f Its     cbt              rtqu1remtnt     of
    Subsection (a) of this ttcrion:
    (1) a liabllit~     iosurance  policy   in   tht
    rainFoum limits required by this Act or a photocopy
    of ttat policy;
    . . . .
    .
    See. 1C. Tbilure        to  fineecitl
    msintbln    rsspoo-
    libility     &, dtffired       in l(10) of this Act
    soCti00
    ie b cl&SO C lisk8tsnor,   punishable by s fine of
    not less than Smenty-fhe     vllbts      ($75).     Sub-
    sequent offenses  rho11  be Clb@S B misdtmtbnors.
    punishbble by t tint of not 1SSS thbn TV0 Eundrtd
    Dollars ($200).
    Sec. 
    ID. Ir to
    prosecution under
    1,~ 8 dtftast
    this Act if the person charged products              in court
    en tutomobile    Mobility      insurbuc8       policy    or 8
    ctrtificbtc of es:lf-insurtnce      prt.ViOUdy      issued co
    thst person thtc: V&S vslid       tt the tint that the
    offtnrt is blltgtd to hbvt occurred bnd the charge.
    shell be dismisetd.
    V.T.C.S.   art.        6701h. S(lB. lC, 1D.
    YOU 8uggtst    4 fact SituAtiOn vhtre         4 IsotOrjSt    trrttttd     for 4
    violetion    of crticle    6701h. section IA, vhile driving 8 borrowed cnr
    thbt vss not insured by Ithe ovner. produced b policy of liability
    insurance (thbt v&s in tfftct           bt the time of the alleged         viokition)
    covering himstlf.        You tot: vhtthtt     the motorist in such t situation
    vould be entitled      to dismi,ssal    of the thbrgt6    under section 10 of cht
    statute.   bnd vhtthtr,    in ‘mcdtr to use the dtftnae.       the policy produced
    must    “contnin  lengunge    Cxst   he   ib covered   vhtn  driving     bu unlnsurtd
    vehicle.”
    In Attorney Gtntrrl Opinion I%‘-547 (19821, the “msniftst       object”
    bnd purpose of the proviblon vbs raid to be “to bssurt the finnncinl
    rteponsibility      of motorir,ts for the protection of those vhose livtc or
    property might be htrmed by the OperbtiOKI of vehicles."            Section 18
    requires     thbt    every “ountr    and/or tptfbtorn    furnish  evidence   of
    f intncial     rtaponclb51ityJ    bad=       section   ID it is 8 defense to
    prosecution      if the “ptrr;a& &f&d      produces” on butomobllt libbility
    insurance policy vhfch m!4:C8 cht rtquirtatntr        of the bet.
    If the operbtor, vbtthtr       or oot he owns the vehicle,     productb n
    v&lid policy     thbt  adtqtrtrrcly protected      tbt public at rht time be
    optrbttd    the vehicle.    he is tnfitltd        to dismmibS&l of the charge
    against him under section         1D of brriclt    6701h. V.T.C.S.    The   polky
    aced not ntctssbri~y     cont.&in specific     ltngubgt expressly referring      to
    vehicles    “not insured by the ovut~ thereof.” so long 8s language in
    the policy hta the lt(;rl         result   of providing  stbtutorlly     adequate
    COVtrbgt   for tht operator vhflt optrbring the vehicle bc the tiw of
    the alleged vlolbtion.       Cf.
    ,-       Attorney Gtntrbl Opinion m-315 (1985);
    IN-577 (1982).
    Roaorrblo Stepbro C. Rourr~d- ?rgo 3                 (Jn439)
    It  the      operator       charged      with     frllurr     to
    uttaio        flrwcial         rempoarlblllty        producer      an
    automobile      liability       lnrurrnce     policy      vhicb  met
    the requiremanta          of the rrfcty      rcspoarlbilicy       law
    at tbo time be operated                  the    vehicle,       be ie
    entitled     to ditrmisaal        of the charge rgainrt           him
    though the veHcle            (if ovned by another) vae not
    insured by the Owner. Ro rpecific                policy language
    is required SC’long aa it ir legally                   adequate    to
    eatirfy   the atstute.
    J-h
    Very truly     your
    .
    JIM      l4ATTOX
    Attorney   General      of Texas
    JACK RIGETOWER
    First   Assistant    Attorney       General
    MARTRELLEB
    Executive Assistant        Attorney      General
    ROBERTGUY
    Special Assistant        Attorney     General
    RICR GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion        Comdttet
    Prepared    by Bxuct Younf,blood
    Assistaot     Attorney    General
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JM-439

Judges: Jim Mattox

Filed Date: 7/2/1986

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017