Texas Attorney General Opinion: WW-746 Page: 2 of 4
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Ho. William A. Harrison, page 2 (WW-746)
System of Texas. However, the opinion declined to pass on the
question of their coverage under the Texas Unemployment Com-
pensation Act because of a prior federal ruling requiring such
employees to make contributions under the Federal Unemploy-
ment Tax Act. Since the writing of this opinion, the Supreme Court
of Texas has had before it questions concerning the status of certain
employees of the State Liquidator.
In the State Board of Insurance v. Betts, 315 S.W.2d 286
(1958) on an original action of mandlamus brought by the State Board
of Insurance and the Insurance Commissioner, praying that a dis-
trict judge be instructed to expunge an order entered by him pur-
porting to increase the monthly compensation allowed to attorneys
for the liquidator-receiver in insurance company receivership cases
pending in his district court, the Supreme Court held that, the pro-
visions of the statute, giving the State Board of Insurance power to
appoint and fix compensation of the Liquidator and his counsel is man-
datory and the judge's order increasing the compensation in disregard
of the statute was void. This decision, and two earlier ones by the
Texas Supreme Court (State Board of Insurance v. Betts, 308 S.W.2d
846 and State Board of Insurance v. Betts, 315 SW,.ZdZ79) have con-
firmed the constitutionality of Article Z1.28, Sec. 12(b), and affirmed
that the full-time employees of the liquidator-receiver appointed in
accordance with this section of the Texas Insurance Code are subject
to the supervision and control of the Commissioner of Insurance.
Attorney General Opinion No. WW-432 also sets out this same conclu-
The Texas Unemployment Compensation Act by Section (5)(g)
of Article 5221(b)-17 exempts state employees from making contribu-
tions under this Act, such section reading in part as follows:
"(g) Service performed in the employ of
this State or of any other state or of any political
subdivision thereof, or any instrumentality of any
one or more of the foregoing which is wholly-owned
by this State or by one or more states or political
subdivisions; and any service performed in the
employ of any instrumentality of this State or of
one or more states or political subdivisions to the
extent that the instrumentality is with respect to
such service, exempt under the Constitution of the
United States from the tax imposed by Section 1600
of the Federal Internal Revenue Code;. ..
In addition, the federal government has reversed its prior
ruling and by letter under date of September 1, 1959 from the Director
of Tax Rulings, Divis ion of the Secretary of the Treasury of the United
States, held that:
Here’s what’s next.
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
Texas. Attorney-General's Office. Texas Attorney General Opinion: WW-746, text, November 24, 1959; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth267358/m1/2/: accessed March 18, 2019), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.