Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1940 )

448 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AU8TlN EoaoraDl8 luoodrou Curt18 COilrrtrAttorney Yrlo, county P8Usal1, wur Dear Slrr OplnloaSi. 04098 Tour rrooat CO inion OS thir dopart- mat&t oa the above Itate 88a r ee8irad. tata Ohi1 8tatat.r l8 t0 ra t ha aumbu 1899, VerBOn’ AmOtatd CiVil sktUtm8, thereon, ln rooorb book8 to be kept for thr pUr- POIO.” ArtiOl@ 5937, VOfllOB’I AlUl0tat.d citil StatUt@8, nad8, in QUt , 68 rOuOW8; 44Y mno?abh i#OO&OW cUX%iO, Paga g "The olarkr O? the dirtriot OOUrt8 8hall raoalra the r0imdng tea8 in Oi~il oa8e8 ror their Se??i008: ~8aoordIng ratarn8 0r anr writ, where suoh return i8 required by law to be reoordad, iUolodIag the returnon all wrIt8, axoapt sub- poena* . l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .so 3 quote from Tax. Jar. Vol. 24, p. 208, as rol- 1Ow8: *Statute8 preaorlblng Sear'for pabllo OiiICa8 are 8tti8tlr Wn8trUad ead hence a right to fee8 may not rest in implication. share this right I8 left to oonetruotfoa, the languaga or the law mast be Wnotrued in raror of the government. Xhera a 8tatUta is capable Of two Wn8trUOtiOn8, one of whioh w00ld give an offioaroompansation ror hi8 samiOa8 in addition to hi8 ilalary,aBd the other not, the latter oonrtruotion should be adopted l + l * An officer ina~be raqulrad by law to persona 8pa- oifia 8ar~ioa8 or dlsoharga addltionaldutia8 for whioh no oospan8atlon i8 provided. Tha obligation to periota OUoh SOX'ViO~a8 18 ilQO8ad as an inoidant to the Ofr~Oe and tha ai- tioar by hi8 aooaptanca tharaor Is dee.nadto hare engaged to ax-formthan without oompaasatioa. Terra111. Xlag, 14 9. K. P 2d) 786; Burk 1. Bexu CoMty, 271 5. W. 122; 3dcCallaT. City of Boakdala, 244 5. By.444. Artiole 3927, lupra, provider that tha Ohark oi the di8trlot oourt ahall reoaira fifty (SO#) oants Sor raoord- ing the ratUrn of ~ZLJwrit, whare suah ratUrn I8 raquIrad by law to be reoordad, IaolUding the return on all writ8 eX#apt subpoenaas. This 8tatUta doe8 not provide a fee ror 8tatI43 rho 0frlou*8 return on procas8, in briar form3L,in tbs alark*r rile dooket . Artlola 1972, aupra, does aot require the raoord- .bg th0 0rri8u*8 return on procasr bat merely raw1x-a~ that a notation of said return be briefly 8tatad ~a the oS*rk*s tile doolcrt. 450 lfoaorabla ?ioodrowCWti8, Pug* 3 The oaea of Taxa Il.8. Railway v. Parker, bb 9.X. Sl33,hold8 among Other thing8, that under a r r ta tuta lllowIng fear for the recording of return8 on any writ rhea ruoh ra- turn 18 raqulrqd by law to ba reoordad, the olark mny not oharga a Sea for raoordlng the return on a oitatlon, there being no law whiah raqulra8 return of oltatlon to be reoordad. In view 0s the foregoing rtatuta8 ~00 are rarpeot- ray adrilledthat It I8 ths opinion 0s thi8 dapartaaat that the olerkr 0s the di8triot court8 hat@ no legal nuthorltyto oharga and oolleot n raoording far for tlm ofrioar~8 return on proca88 whara 8uoh return i8 8hom in *brief row on the olark’r file dookat; n mare notation on the olark*s fila boakat rhowlng the orrloar*8 return on pro0888 doe8 not antItla the olark to any reoording f ea. Tharafora, your qua8tion i8 ra- 8pNZtfIdiY anrwarad in the aagatiTa. You are further adrised that such olark8 are antltl- ad to a fifty (SOQ) cant Sea for raoordiag the rattis of imy writ, where eueh return I8 required by law to be raoordad, and ruoh returns are aotuallr recorded. Trusting that the foregoing fully auawero your fn- Wry, we remain Tour8 vary truly ATT&HEY GESXRAL OF TEXAS *,W~~ Ardall Uilllams A8aiatant