TX JM-247 December 13, 1984

Could Harris County transfer its child-support payment collection division from the juvenile board to the county domestic relations office?

Short answer: No. JM-247 concluded that article 5139W specifically placed the child-support collection service under the Harris County Juvenile Board, and the commissioners court could not transfer that statutory duty to the domestic relations office.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1984. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Texas law, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1984
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: This is an official Texas Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority in Texas courts but are not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. The opinion dates from 1984; verify current child-support, juvenile-board, domestic-relations-office, and county-government law before relying on it.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official AG opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original AG opinion (PDF)

Texas AG Opinion JM-247: Harris Child Support Division

Plain-English summary

Harris County's juvenile probation department had a Child Support Division, and the juvenile board had designated the chief juvenile probation officer to receive child-support payments. The county attorney asked whether that service was "specifically established by statute" and whether the commissioners court could transfer it to the Domestic Relations Office. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

JM-247 concluded that article 5139W specifically established the Child Support Division as a statutory child-support collection service. Because of that specific statute, article 5142a-1 did not govern Harris County's collection of child-support payments. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

The opinion also concluded that the commissioners court could not transfer the function. It said the court was "without authority" to move the division from the juvenile board to the Domestic Relations Office created under article 2338-1e. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

The offices had different statutory roles. JM-247 read article 2338-1e as authorizing legal services related to child support and visitation, but not as authorizing the Domestic Relations Office to receive or distribute child-support payments. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

The transfer was also barred by the rule that when the legislature assigns an official duty to a named officer or board, the commissioners court cannot move that duty to someone else. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1984. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Was the Harris County Child Support Division specifically established by statute?

Yes. JM-247 concluded that the division established under article 5139W was a "child support collection service . . . specifically established by statute" within article 5142a-1's exception. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Could the commissioners court transfer the collection service to the Domestic Relations Office?

No. The opinion said the commissioners court could not ignore duties imposed on the juvenile board and transfer that function to the Domestic Relations Office. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Who could the juvenile board authorize to receive child-support payments?

JM-247 said article 5139W allowed the juvenile board to direct either the chief juvenile probation officer or the district clerk to receive the payments. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

What role did article 2338-1e give the Domestic Relations Office?

The opinion read it as authorizing legal and informational services to establish and enforce child-support and visitation orders, not a collection service to receive and distribute payments. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Background and statutory framework

Article 5139W established the Harris County Juvenile Board and juvenile probation department. Section 10 allowed the board, independently of the commissioners court and at its option, to direct the chief juvenile probation officer to receive child-support payments. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Article 2338-1e applied to counties above the stated population threshold and allowed the commissioners court to create a Domestic Relations Office directly responsible to the court. The office could provide legal and informational services concerning support, visitation, paternity, and legitimation. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Article 5142a-1 generally allowed a county to establish a domestic relations office, but section 7(a) excluded a county in which a child-support collection service was specifically established by statute. JM-247 found that exclusion applicable to Harris County. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Citations and references

  • Canales v. Laughlin, 214 S.W.2d 451, 453 (Tex. 1948), supported the rule that a commissioners court has only powers conferred expressly or by necessary implication. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf
  • Aldrich v. Dallas County, 167 S.W.2d 560 (Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1942, writ dism'd), and Navarro County v. Tullos, 237 S.W. 982 (Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1922, writ ref'd), supported the rule against transferring a statutory duty assigned to a named officer or board. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf
  • Harris County v. Schoenbacher, 594 S.W.2d 106 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.), appeared in the discussion of the probation department's responsibility to the juvenile board. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0247.pdf

Source

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain. The linked PDF is authoritative.

The Attorney General of Texas

December 13, 1984

Honorable Mike Driscoll
Harris County Attorney
1001 Preston, Suite 634
Houston, Texas 77002

Opinion No. JM-247

Re: Whether responsibility for the Harris County Child Support Division may be transferred from the Juvenile Board to the Domestic Relations Office

Dear Mr. Driscoll:

You inform us that the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department has established a Child Support Division. It is our understanding that the Harris County Juvenile Board has designated the chief juvenile probation officer to receive child support payments in Harris County pursuant to section 10(a) of article 5139W, V.T.C.S.

In that regard, you ask:

  1. Is the Child Support Division, as it is now attached to the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department, a "child support collection service specifically established by statute" [within the meaning of section 7(a) of article 5142a-1, V.T.C.S.]?

  2. Will the commissioners court be allowed to transfer responsibility for the Child Support Division from the Juvenile Board to the Domestic Relations Office [established pursuant to article 2338-1e, V.T.C.S.]?

The Harris County Commissioners Court has only the powers conferred either expressly or by necessary implication by the constitution and statutes of this state. See Tex. Const. art. V, §18; Canales v. Laughlin, 214 S.W.2d 451, 453 (Tex. 1948). We begin with the working assumption that the collection of child support payments in Harris County may arguably be governed by articles 5139W, 5142a-1, and/or 2338-1e, V.T.C.S. We will analyze these statutes to determine which ones actually govern this matter. Thus, the answers to your questions will depend upon which of these statutes authorizes the collection of child support payments in Harris County.

The Harris County Juvenile Probation Department was established in 1965 along with the Harris County Juvenile Board by the Texas Legislature. See V.T.C.S. art. 5139W, §§1, 11. Section 10(a) of article 5139W, as amended in 1975, provides that the Juvenile Board has the power, independently of the commissioners court and at its option, to direct the chief juvenile probation officer to receive child support payments. The only other person the Juvenile Board may authorize under the act to receive child support payment is the district clerk. See V.T.C.S. art. 5139W, §10(b).

Section 1 of article 2338-1e, V.T.C.S., provides:

Section 1. In counties having a population in excess of 2,000,000, as shown by the last preceding United States Census, the county commissioners court may create a domestic relations office to provide services to establish and enforce court orders providing for the support and/or visitation rights to a child, to establish paternity or legitimation of a child, and to provide informational services to assist parties affected by a court order in understanding, complying with, and enforcing the duties and obligations in the court order pertaining to child support and rights of visitation. Upon such creation, said designated county office shall be directly responsible to the commissioners court. The chief administrative officer of the designated county office so created shall be appointed by a majority vote of the commissioners court of the county.

(Emphasis added).

Harris County falls within the 2,000,000 population bracket of the statute. We conclude that the dominant purpose of article 2338-1e is to authorize the Harris County Commissioners Court to establish a Domestic Relations Office to act as a legal agency to provide those legal services necessary to assist those persons having a legal right to child support and/or visitation privileges. The statute does not authorize the commissioners court to establish a Domestic Relations Office to function as a collection service to receive and/or distribute child support payments.

A county commissioners court is also authorized to establish a Domestic Relations Office pursuant to article 5142a-1, V.T.C.S., which provides:

Section 1. The commissioners court of a county may establish a domestic relations office with the powers and duties as provided in this article.

Sec. 2. (a) A domestic relations office established under Section 1 of this article may be administered by the juvenile board of a county or multicounty area or otherwise as provided by the commissioners court.

(b) Any domestic relations office currently in existence by statute or tradition and which has been under the control of and governed by a juvenile board by statute or tradition shall continue to operate under the current administration as established by such statute or tradition.

. . . .

Sec. 7. (a) This article does not apply to a county in which a child support collection service is specifically established by statute.

(b) This article is cumulative of other statutes relating to juvenile boards and child support collection offices.

(c) Another statute relating to funds for the operation of a child support office and providing for an additional filing fee in excess of $5 prevails over this Act to the extent that the other statute conflicts with the maximum additional filing fee provided by this Act.

(Emphasis added).

This statute excepts from its application those counties "in which a child support collection service is specifically established by statute. . . ." V.T.C.S. art. 5142a-1, §7(a). As indicated above, the legislature has established the Juvenile Board of Harris County with the duty to "direct whether . . . the chief juvenile probation officer shall receive payments for the support of wives and children. . . ." See V.T.C.S. art. 5139W, §5(f). Accordingly, in response to your first question, we conclude that the Child Support Division of the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department established pursuant to article 5139W, V.T.C.S., is a "child support collection service . . . specifically established by statute" within the meaning of section 7(a) of article 5142a-1, V.T.C.S. The Harris County Commissioners Court may establish a child support collection service only pursuant to article 5139W, V.T.C.S.

In regard to your second question, the general rule is that when the legislature imposes upon an officer or governmental board the performance of certain acts as part of an official duty, the commissioners court is without authority to transfer the performance of that official duty to any other person or body than that named in the law. See Aldrich v. Dallas County, 167 S.W.2d 560 (Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1942, writ dism'd); Navarro County v. Tullos, 237 S.W. 982 (Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1922, writ ref'd). You ask whether the Harris County Commissioners Court is authorized to transfer responsibility for the Child Support Division of the Harris County Probation Department, which was created pursuant to article 5139W, V.T.C.S., to the Domestic Relations Office established pursuant to article 2338-1e, V.T.C.S. As previously stated, the Domestic Relations Office, which is directly responsible to the commissioners court, has the duty of providing those legal services necessary to ensure a party's right to child support and/or visitation privileges. On the contrary, the Child Support Division of the Harris County Probation Department is administered by the chief juvenile probation officer, but it is responsible to the Harris County Juvenile Board. See Harris County v. Schoenbacher, 594 S.W.2d 106 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.).

Accordingly, the Harris County Commissioners Court is not authorized to ignore the duties imposed on the Harris County Juvenile Board to provide a child support collection service and transfer the performance of that function to the Domestic Relations Office.

SUMMARY

The Child Support Division of the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department was specifically established by article 5139W, V.T.C.S.; accordingly, article 5142a-1, V.T.C.S., does not govern the collection of child support payments in Harris County. Additionally, the Harris County Commissioners Court is without authority to transfer the Child Support Division from the Juvenile Board to the Domestic Relations Office established pursuant to article 2338-1e, V.T.C.S.

Very truly yours,

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

TOM GREEN
First Assistant Attorney General

DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Tony Guillory
Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE

Rick Gilpin, Chairman
Colin Carl
Susan Garrison
Tony Guillory
Jim Moellinger
Jennifer Riggs
Nancy Sutton

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1984 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Texas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.