Texas Constitution talk:Article XVI, Section 17: Difference between revisions
imported>Admin No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "refd)" to "ref'd)") |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
certain specified exceptions, any person from simultaneously holding “more than one civil | certain specified exceptions, any person from simultaneously holding “more than one civil | ||
office of emolument.” See also State ex rel. Peden v. Valentine. 198 S.W. 1006, 1007 | office of emolument.” See also State ex rel. Peden v. Valentine. 198 S.W. 1006, 1007 | ||
(Tex. Civ. App.--Fort Worth 1917, writ | (Tex. Civ. App.--Fort Worth 1917, writ ref'd) (upon acceptance of second, incompatible | ||
office, first office is ipso facto vacated). In L-owe v. Sfufe, 201 S.W. 986 (I’ex. Grim. App. | office, first office is ipso facto vacated). In L-owe v. Sfufe, 201 S.W. 986 (I’ex. Grim. App. | ||
1918), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals determined that article XVI, section 17 does | 1918), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals determined that article XVI, section 17 does | ||
Latest revision as of 11:22, September 14, 2023
Texas Legal Guide (texaslegalguide.com) is currently under construction.
This page is available for comment and discussion regarding the page Article XVI, Section 17 of the Texas Constitution.
add[edit topic]
Delamora v. State, 128 S.W.3d 344, 356 (Tex. App.-Austin 2004, pet. ref' d)
review[edit topic]
Jones v. City of Jefferson, 1 SW. 903 (Tex. 1886)
review[edit topic]
S&are v. G&r, 19 S.W. 302 (Tex. 1892
review[edit topic]
The Texas Supreme Court determined, in Pruitt v. Glen Rose Independent School District No. 1, 84 S.W.Zd 1004, 1007 (Tex. 1935). that article XVI. section 17 did not apply to an officer who has “stepped down” from office by operation of article XVI, section 40, which prohibits, with certain specified exceptions, any person from simultaneously holding “more than one civil office of emolument.” See also State ex rel. Peden v. Valentine. 198 S.W. 1006, 1007 (Tex. Civ. App.--Fort Worth 1917, writ ref'd) (upon acceptance of second, incompatible office, first office is ipso facto vacated). In L-owe v. Sfufe, 201 S.W. 986 (I’ex. Grim. App. 1918), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals determined that article XVI, section 17 does not apply to an officer who is ineligible under article XVI, section 12 of the Texas Constitution to hold or exercise an office of profit or trust under this state because he or she holds or exercises an office of profit or trust under the United States. I
add ?[edit topic]
Thus, pursuant to article XVI, section 65, the county judge has automatically resigned his office. However, he continues to hold over in his office under XVI, section 17 of the Texas Constitution, until his successor is appointed and qualifies for office.
https://www2.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/opinions/48morales/op/1996/pdf/dm0377.pdf
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1967/cm0151.pdf