Texas Attorney General Opinion: WW-813 Page: 6 of 8
This text is part of the collection entitled: Texas Attorney General Opinions and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Mr. Franklin L. Smith, page 6 (WW-813)
Hanna, 246 Federal 157, in which the court, holding that
a Delaware county with no corporate organization or status
could not be sued in admiralty for the maritime tort of its
agents, said:
"A municipal corporation or other organiz-
ed political district of a state having a general
capacity to sue and be sued may be held liable
in a court of admiralty in an action in personam for
damages resulting .from negligence. or other . tort on'Thu
part 'of itS officers or.'agents while acting. it. their
representative character, where the principles of
maritime law as recognized by the Constitution and
laws of the United States, justify the granting of
such relief. The circumstances that, at the time
of the commission of the tort, such corporation or
district was engaged in the discharge of a govern-
mental or sovereign rather than a subordinate or
local function is immaterial. And where such corpo-
ration or organized district possesses such general
capacity to sue and be sued, it is not competent
for the state to provide that such corporation or
district shall enjoy immunity from accountability in
a proceeding in personam in a court of admiralty for
the recovery of damages for a maritime tort commit-
ted by it through its officers or agents. In such
case it is beyond the power of the state to defeat
or render nugatory rights and liabilities created
and recognized by the paramount authority of the
Constitution and laws of the United States. . ..
In the very recent case, Nueces County, Texas Road Dis-
trict No. 4.v. The Nellie B.A.B. No. 1,i84, the United States
District Court, S.D. Texas, Corpus Christi Division, it is
stated as follows:
"The short answer to this contention, at
least so far as the claims for tort not resulting
in death are concerned, is the deeply rooted prin-
ciple that a state cannot deprive a party of re-
dress in Admiralty against a municipality for the
negligence of its servants . . . There is a dis-
tinction between immunity from process, which goes
to the question of Jurisliction, and immunity from
liability, which deals with the substantive law of
admiralty. Where the Court has jurisdiction, as
here, /ecause the county may sue and be sued, li-B,
Tex. Jur. 120-123, sees. 87 and 887 the state may not
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
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-813, text, March 22, 1960; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth267425/m1/6/: accessed May 8, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.