_ .-; _ - - ::~:::-.+ ittis Y",••,_ ~:-:,; -i :. -'-7 u , addT'e 55 cis llr t Ctt ai7GVe aC'eTid Ez ~...._... .. ~ ~ .. n ... .. .. ~ ~ 7. t e. lil ,. Tne "esti^av ].a~•!" is in e7=fect .arid can k~e 1_lsed 1-lntil election. Ttlc~t'e aT"e uVer'S'iiyi7t> L'•ii ~Cti~;:iu.. ,..._... ..~.-.. _...•_=:.=:=u :._ _.._ ._.- :'. ~. 'f:t :s'r set 7'i. 7. tiii. t~RRIL S, I~9? WE, THE FOLLOWING LAND OWNERS AND TAX PAYERS LIViNIi IN HILL COUNTRY RANCH ESTATES NUMBER III, PETITION FOR OUR RIGHTS AND RELIEF IN REMOVAL OF THE FREE ROAMING, PRIVATELY OWNED SHEEP AND GOATS THAT ARE DAMAGING OUR PROPERTIES. THESE ANIMALS HAVE BROKEN OFF WATER FAUCI~"FS, EATEN UUR FLOWERS, SHRUBS, TREES, GRASS ANll DES'IROYEDt LANDSCAt'LNG. WP: HAVE BEl/N UNABLE TO RESOLVE THIS PROBLEM, REGARDLESS OF OUR EFFOR T S TO C"O(~PERATE WITH TIi)U Y OFFII;lALS, DUklNG THE PAST TIIREE MONTHS. FOR SOME OF TH PERTY OWNERS, THIS HAS BEEN RECURkiN(i FOR THE PAST T W O TO THREE YEARS. WE RESPECTFULLY REIZUEST THAT THE KERR COUNTY .~UTHORITII~ CONTACT TIC OWNER OF T) IESE ANIMALS AND RE(2UIRE THEII2 IMMEDIATE REMOVAL AND CONFINEMENT WITHIN PASTURES OR STRUCTURES SUFFICIENT TO PREVENT THEIR CONTINUT~SCAPE AND DESTRUCTION OF OUR PROPERTIES. WE PREFER TO RESc9t,VE THIS PROBLEM WITHOUT LITIGATION, BUT FULLY INTEND TO PRESS CHARGES AND ASK FOR DAMAGES, IF TIiESE ANIMALS CONTINUE TU DESTROY OUR PROPERTIES. PLEASE PROVIDE UB~RELIEF FROM THIS SITUA,T~I/ON NUW ~~ .F_ , - - - , _ _ - -_ ,~ „ -~ - -- .~` ., d ~ . ~ z - = -- - ~ _- ~ rt ~-h=i K R,~ia - -- 2Z~a~ Qru~,~~/ri _ - ~ - ~ ~ ~ r -- -- - ' e~~~-aa4~8 r' - r~ r • ~ ' ~ G../. Y 2S X11 ~' ~ _T (f °7 S ~A _'r____ D~t_1~ Flled ~ ~~ DayoAD.19~ ~~ ~~~~Kerr nty~ Texas Deputy -- g a©'~ ~~` G~c~ - 1 ~(r~~r~~ c~ {~ bL r1'v ~~ 3x -- __ . ~ _ z .rG ~- ~_ s~"t~-r_~i..~~' _ ~ LJ_~. ~?'W ~LJ~C'i ' ..~« G-C<.i '~F-, l~O,~ $i ~ i~v~_ c ~ ~w~IcLH. _ 1 cep __ _6yk.ci, ~4K ~-- 6~~~j~~ 7~sG2 s~ ' ~"~'- ~_ 02010 /~-e~ 1 Y~~•- ~~~J`~•~/,~/°Z~ ~'.~~/~-~J' 1 ~ ~ -- ' ~C.E'_ ~ -- (e s ~ ~v~G /ffiY.ly ~ c~ T-t- ~,fi`''~ . 1~J 2 Z ~ ~_ ~ - -- - -- ~ ~ ~ ~`- -- 1ti ~~,t~c.~ ' e&- t L __ _ -* Y - PAGE ? Oi^ 2 PETITION FOR RELIEF FROM SHEEP AND Ci0AT5 DAMAfiINU PROPERTY ~, n( aEicicia ~l ye COUNN CLERK KERB COUNN 700 MAIN ST., RM. 122 KERRVILLE, TEXAS 78028-5389 Tel. 830-792-2255 Fax 836-792-2274 PETITION FOR STOCK LAW NEEDS THE FOLLOWING: 1. Name printed underneath signature 2. Date of birth 3. Date petition signed 4. Voter's registration number 5. Only 23 signatures are readable 14 are not registered voters VERIFYING PETITIONS I. PETITIONS Chapter 277 of the Election Code applies to all election petitions filed under a law outside the Election Code except for a local option liquor election petition and candidates' petitions. A. Six Siguature Requirements 1. Signer's signature (the only requirement that must be in the signer's handwriting); 2. Signer's printed name; 3. Signer's voter registration number and, if the territory from which signatures must be obtained is situated in more than one county, the county of registration; 4. .Signer's date of;birth (NEW); 5. Signer's residence address; and 6. Date of signing. NOTE: If any one of these elements is absent, the signature is invalid. B. "Residence Address" 1. Street address OR address at which mail is received if residence has no address; 2. City; 3. State (not required if territory is wholly contained within Texas); and 4. Zip code. NEW-omission of zip code: now does-not invalidate signature. C. "Qualified Voter" Reference to "qualified voter" outside the Election Code means "registered voter" as to the eligibility to sigu a petition. "Registered voter" is defined as a person registered to vote in Texas whose registration is effective. [Sec. Loos(I6» D. Miscellaneous M-1 1. The signer's signature is the ONLY information that is required to appear on the petition in the signer's own handwriting. AlI other required information may be filled in by another person. 2. The use of ditto marks or abbreviations on a petition does not invalidate a signature if the required information is reasonably ascertainable. ~~ p n n n p F 3. The omission of` Texas, TX, or Tea. from. the signer s residence address. does not. invalidate a signature (unless the political subdivision: is situated in more#han one state) NOR does the omission of zipcode. 4. A petition signature is invalid if the signer signed the petition earlier than the 180th day before the date the petition is filed. E. Withdrawal of Signature (Section 277.0022) 1. A signer may not withdraw the signature from a petition after the date the petition is filed. Before that date, a signer may withdraw the signature 6y filing an affidavit with the receiving authority requesting that the signature be withdrawn. 2. A withdrawal affidavit filed by mail is considered filed at the time of its receipt. If the affidavit is received after the petition is filed, the affidavit is of no effect. F. Supplementing a Petition (Section 277.0023) 1. Generally, a petition may not be supplemented, modified, or amended after the date it is filed. 2. If a petition is required to be filed by a specified deadline, the petitioner may file one supplementary petition BY THAT DEADLINE if (1) the original petition contains a number of signatures that EXCEEDS the required minimum number by 10% or more, AND (2) the original petition is received NOT LATER THAN THE 10TH DAY BEFORE the deadline. The receiving authority must notify the petitioner of the sufficiency of the original petition not later than the 5th regular business day after its receipt. II. EXCEPTION TO CHAPTER 277 Local Option Liquor Petitions [Secs. 251.10, 251.11, Alcoholic Beverage Code] A. Voter Registrar's Statutory Duty 1. Must check names and voting precincts to determine whether signers are qualified voters at time petition was issued. 2. Must certify the number of valid signatures to the commissioners court. M-2 B. Petition Requirements 1. Signer must be a registered voter. 2. Signer's voter registration number must be correct. 3. Signer's signature, voter registration number, and residence address must be in signer's own handwriting. 4. Signer's name must be signed exactly as it appears on the current voter registration list. 5. The petition must be filed within 30 days of issuance. 6. The minimum number of signatures required is 35% of the registered voters of the city, justice precinct, or county, as applicable. NOTE: It has been the consistent interpretation of this office that except as otherwise provided by law, once a local option liquor petition is filed, no signatures may be added or withdrawn. Thus, when a petition is filed, it stands or falls on its own merits. III. OTHER PETITIONS There are many different types of petitions authorized by Texas law. These petitions may involve political subdivisions other than the county. The laws relating to these petitions generally require the governing body or its clerk, not the voter registrar, to verify the petitions. The entities assigned by statute to verify these petitions will invariably require the assistance of the local voter registrar in determining whether the signatures on a petition are those of registered voters. The following are common examples of types of petitions: A. Miscellaneous Petitions Calling for Elections 1. Bingo petitions [the Bingo Enabling Act, Article 179d, Texas Civil Statutes] 2. Horse Racing petitions [the Texas Racing Act, Article 179e, Texas Civil Statutes] NOTE: Signature must be exactly the same as name on voter registration list. 3. Tax Rollback petitions [Secs. 26.07, 26.08, and 26.085, Property Tax Code] 4. Petition under Certificate of Obligation Act of 1971 petitions [Section 271.049, Texas Local Government Code] M-3 5. Petition to Incorporate as a Type B Municipality [Secs. 7.001-7.008, Local Government Code] 6. Petition to Abolish Municipality Ceasing to Have Residents [Secs. 62.201-62.204, Local Government Code] 7. Petition to Adopt City Manager Form of Government [Sec. 25.022, Local Government Code] 8. Petition to Abolish City Manager Form of Government [Section 25.071, Local Government Code] 9. Municipal Disincorporation petitions [Sec. 62.002, Local Government Code] 10. Rural Fire Prevention District petitions [Secs. 794.011-794.013, Health & Safety Code] 11. Petitions for Removal of Board Members of Certain Rapid Transit Authorities [Chs. 451 and 452, Texas Transportation Code] NOTE: These are the only types of petitions that must be signed in "ink or indelible pencil" [Secs. 451.604(c)(3), 452.652(c)(3), Texas Transportation Code] B. Candidacy Petitions 1. Candidates' Petitions in Lieu of Filing Fee [Secs. 141.061-141.070, Election Code] NOTE: Requirements apply to write-in candidates for the November general election, as well as primary candidates. [Secs. 141.061-141.070, Election Code] 2. Independent Candidates [Secs. 142.004-142.009] outlines\cou nty.9Tccse m9Tpetitio n.d oc M-4 RPR.16 '97 9~36RM KERR CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.1 LIVESTOCK LAWS OFTEXAS CHAPTER IV. ESTRAYS Ark 4.01. EstrayAct The legal procedure of impounding and disposing of estrays is prescribed in Chapter 142 of the Texas Agriculture Code.1S~ The Estray Act was extensively rewritten by flee Texas Legislature in 1986 and amended in 1993 to cover exotic livestock and exotic fowl. Art. 4.02 Meaning of Estray An "estray" is a valuable domestic animal which has strayed from its owner.785 An animal may be an "estray" even though its owner is remote or would not reclaim his wandering animal with reasonable diligence,r86 or the animal is found a great distance from its accustomed range 187 As used in the Fstray Act, "estray" means any stray horse, stallion, mare, gelding, filly, colt, mule, hinny, jack, jennet, hog, sheep, goat, any species of cattle, exotic livestock or exotic fowl 18fl "Exotic Livestock" means grass- eating or plant-eating, single-hooved or cloven-hooved mammals that aze not indigenous to this state and are known as ungulates, including animals from the swine, horse, tapir, rhinoceros, elephant, deer, and antelope families but not including a mammal defined by Section 63.001, Parks and Wildlife Code, as a game animal, or by Section 71.D01, Parks and Wildlife Code, as afur-bearing animal, or any other indigenous marfima] regulated by the Parks and Wildlife Department as an endangered or threatened species. The term does not include a nonindigenous mammal located on publicly owned land.1R9 Art. 4.03. Finding an Fstray; Nntice A person who finds an estray on his own property, or the custodian of public property who finds an estray on pubic property, must report the presence of the estray to the sheriff of the county where the estray is discovered as soon as reasonably possible.19" If the sheriff or his designee determines that an estray located on public property is dangerous to the public, he may immediately impound the animal without notifying the owner.l'r If the owner does not immediately remove the estray, the sheriff must proceed with the impoundment process. (See Art. 4.07). Art 4.04. Redemption of Fstray Found on Private Property The owner of an estray found on private property may redeem the animal from the oHmer or occupant of private property by paying a redemption fee, if applicable, and any damages incurred by the owner of the property?~ If the owner fails to redeem the estray within a reasonable period after notification, the sheriff, at the request of the qPR. 16 '97 9~36W'1 KERR CO JP 210 367 3005 P.2 QL,IVESTOCK LAWS OF TEXAS owner of the property where the estray is located, must immediately impound the animal. Arr: 4.05. Redemption Fee and Damages The sheriff, or sheriff s designee, may require a collection fee in an amount set by the sheriff not to exceed $25 if the sheriff or his designee is present at.the time the owner claims the estray.l~ If the estray is found on private property, the owner of the property is entitled to receive from the owner of the estray a reasonable amount for maintenance of the estray and any damages, so long as the notice of estray was given to the sheriff no later than the fifth day after the owner of the property discovered the estray. The owner of the property may accept an agreed amount from the owner of the estray or file a petition with the justice court to have the amount determined by the justice of the peace? However, the property owner may not hold the livestock under any circumstances. If the sheriff assessed a colk~ction fee for an estray, the owner of the estray may file a similar petition with the justice court if he disagrees with the amount of the fee.t9s Art. 4.06. Justice Court Petition and Appeal A petition in justice court seeking a determination of the amount of a redemption payment or the amount of a collection fee must contain the following: (1) the name of the owner of the estray; (2} a description of the estray; (3) the number of days the estray was trespassing; (4) the name of the owner of the property; (5) the purpose Eor which the land on which the trespass occurred is used; and (6) a statement that the estray owner and the property owner are unable to agree on the amount of the payment.~% Either the owner of the estray or the owner of the property may appeal the justice court's determination to a panel of three disinterested persons familiar with livestock who re,ide in the county. The panel is appointed by the justice of the peace,197 and the panel's decision is final. Ark 4.07. Impour:dment of Estray The sheriff or the sheriffs designee must impound an estray in the following situations: (1) the owner of the estray is unknown; (2) the sheriff or the sheriff's designee is unable to notify the owner; (3) the estray is dangerous to the public; (~l) the estray is located on the public property and after notification is not immediately removed .by the owner; or (5) the estray is located on private property and is not reifeemed within a reasonable time after notification.~'R' After impounding the estray, the sheriff must prepare a Notice of Estray (see Appendix), and file sutlt notice in the estray records in the county clerk's office. 23 APR. 16 '97 9~37RM KEJ2R CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.3 LIVESTOCK LAWS OFTEXAs Art. 4.08. Owner of Esrray LUtknown If the owner of the astray is unknown, the sheriff or the sheriff's designee must make a diligent seazch for the identity of the owner of the astray, including a search in the county register of recorded brands, if the animal has a brand. If the owner is not identified the sheriff must advertise the impoundment of the astray in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least twice during the fifteen days after the date the animal was impounded. Notice of the impoundment must be posted on the public notice board at the courthouse.~~ This can be accomplished by posting the Notice of Estray mentioned above (See Appendix) on the public bulletin board, along with the Notice of Impoundment (See Appendix). Though not specifically required by statute, the sheriff should also execute an Affidavit of Publication and Posting of Notice of Fstray (See Appendix) to verify that the publication and posting requirements have been met, and place the affidavit in the astray records of the county. Art. 4.09. Recovery of Impounded Estray 6y Owner The owner of an astray may recover possession of the astray at any time before the astray is sold ~' To recover possession the owner is required to execute an Affidavit of Ownership (See Appendix), which must be approved by the sheriff or his designee and filed in the astray records of the county clerk. The owner must also pay all astray handling expenses before he can retake possession of the animal which may include all expenses incurred by the county in impounding, handling, seeking the owner of, or selling the astray as determined by the county sheriff. If the owner of the astray disagrees with the amount set by the sheriff, he may petition the justice court and appeal in the manner described above. (See Art. 4.06). A person may claim to be the owner of exotic livestock or exotic fowl only if the animal is tagged, branded, or marked in another conspicuous manner that can be read or identified from a long distance and that identifies the animal as the property of the claimant201 If all of the above steps have been taken, then the owner must execute an Affidavit of Receipt of Estray (See Appendix) and deliver it to the sheriff to be filed in the county clerks office ~z Only then can the owner retake possession of the astray. ArG 4.10. Ilse of Estray The astray may not be used by the sheriff for any purpose during the period held 20J Likewise, an astray on private property may not be used by the owner of the property for any purpose.2°a za RPR.16 '97 9~3HRM KERR CO JP4 210 367 3005'--~.4~'~'~~ LIVESTOCK LAWS OF TEXAS Art. 4.11. Sale of Impounded Estray If the ownership of the estray is not determined before the third day after the date of final advertisement, or if the estray is not redeemed before the 18th day after the date of impoundment; the county has title to the estray and the sheriff must sell the estray at either a sheriffls sale or public auction licensed by the US. Deparhnent of Agriculture. The sheriff will allocate the proceeds of the sale in the following order of priority: (1) payment of the expenses of sale; (2) payment of the impoundment fee and other chazges due the sheriff; and (3) if applicable, payment of any amount for maintenance and damage due to the owners of the private property from which the estray was impounded. if there are proceeds remaining after the sale and all expenses have been paid, the sheriff must pay the balance to the owner, if known If the owner is still unknown, the balance must be deposited in the county jury fund, subject to the claim of the original owner of the estray.206 The owner may recover the net proceeds of the sale within one year of the sale by providing an Affidavit of Ownership which has been approved by the sheriff and filed in the estray records of the county clerk.207 Any time the sheriff sells an estray the sheriff must execute a Report of Sale of Impounded Stock (See Appendix) and file the report in the county estray records of the county c]erk.~08 Art. 4.12. Escape or Death of Impounded Estray If the estray dies or escapes while impounded, the sheriff shall make a written report of death or escape and file the report with the county clerk for placement in the county estray record? 25 RPR.16 '97 9~39RM KERR CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.5 LIVESTOCK LAWS OF TEXAS CHAPTER V. LIVESTOCK RUNNING AT LARGE Art. 5.01. General i2ule There is no general law which prohibits an owner of stock from permitting his stock to nan at large.'30 Unless a Stock Law is in force, it is permissible for livestock to run at large.zll However, the owner of the stock may be held liable for damages caused by his trespassing stock as provided by the Estray Act 232 An exception to the general rule prohibits stock from running at large on highways. (See Art. 5.03). Art. 5.02. Local Option Stock Laws Sec. 5.021. Livestock Other Than Cattle (a) Petition and Election If 50 freeholders (resident owners of land) of any county or 20 freeholders of any azea with a county sign a petition stating the class or classes of anunals which they desire shall not run at large in the county or area, the commissioners court must order an election to be held in the county or area for the purpose of permitting the freeholders to determine whether any horses, mules, jacks, jennets, donkeys, hogs, sheep or goats shall be permitted to run at large in the county or area within the county.2ls When there is territory between two areas of a county which have adopted a Stock Law, or when there is territory adjoining an area w-I'uc as adopted a Stock Law in a county or in an adjoining county, and in the territory there are less than 50 freeholders, an election must be ordered on a petition of. a majority of the freeholders residing in the temtory by the commissioners court of the county in which the territory lies. If there are less than 20 freeholders in the intervening or adjoining territory, on a petition of a majority of the owners of the land, the commissioners court must issue an order extending the Stock Law to the territory and the territory must be included in the territory of the adjoining area. Where there are no freeholders in the intervening or adjoining temtory, on a petition of the owner or owners of the land, the commissioners court must issue and order extending the Stock Law to the territory, and the terrirory must be included in the territory of the adjoining azea. Any person or persoivs who own lands adjoining any other lands which have been added to territory in which a Stock Law is in force, have the same right and on a petition of the owner or owners, the commissioners court must issue an order extending the Stock Law to the territory and it must be included in the territory of the adjoining area 239 Upon the filing of a petition, the commissioners court, at its next regular term, must order an election to be held throughout the county or in the particular azea of the county not less than 30 days from the date of the order.zls If a 26 eia .~,r daa5 P.6 rx i~. .u ~~ ~',»N'1 hc.rcrc l,V Jrti LIVESTOCK LAWS OF TEXAS . majority of the votes cast at the election is against letting the specified animals run at lazge, the County Judge must immediately issue his proclamation declaring the result of the election and post the proclamation at the courthouse door. After the expiration of 30 days from the issuance of the proclamation, it is unlawful to permit any of the specified stock to run at large in the county or area within the county?~b (b) Lawful Fence Owners and lessees of land aze required to fence against stock which is permitted to run at lazge. If a Stock Law has been adopted in the county or area within a county, the owner or lessee must fence only against stock not covered by the Stock Law or stock permitted to run at large. Any fence which is sufficient to keep out ordinary stock permitted to run at ]arge is a lawful fence. Three bazbed wires with posts not more than 30 feet apart, and one or more stays between them, or pickets four feet high and not more than six inches apart constitute a lawful fence, provided the fence is at Ieast four feet high. The keehoiders of any county or area within a county in which a Stock Law is in force may decide by a majority vote whether three barbed wires without a boazd shall constitute a lawful fence.n~ Sec. 5.022. Cattle (a) Petition and Elecrion If 35 freeholders (resident owners of land) of any county or ]5 freeholders of any area within a county sign a petition stating that they do not desire That cattle be permitted to run at large, the commissioners court must order an election to be held in the county or area within the county for the purpose of enabling the freeholders to determine whether cattle will be permitted to run at large.n8 Countywide elections are not permitted -only. elections in areas within the county, in the #ollowing counties: Andrews, Coke, Culberson, Hardin, Hemphill, Hudspeth, Jasper, Jefferson, Kenedy, Kinney, LaSalle, Loving, Motley, Newton, Presidio, Roberts, Schleicher, Terry, Tyler, Upton, Wharton, and Yoakum.n9 When there is territory between two areas within a county which have adopted the Stock Law, and in the intervening territory there are less than 50 freeholders, an election must be ordered on the petition of a majority of the freeholders residing in the intervening territory.u0 When the petition is filed, the commissioners court must order an election to be held not less than 30 days from the date of the order.~i If a majority of the votes cast is "for the stock law," the county judge must immediately issue his proclamation declaring the result and have the proclamation posted at the courthouse door. After 30 days from the issuance of the proclamation, it is unlawful to permit cattle to run at large. 27 RPR.16 '97 9~40Rt1 KERR CO JPA 210 367 3005 P.7 L1 V ESTOCK LAWS OF TEXAS {b) Election to Repeal Stock Law on Cattle Upon the written petition of 200 freeholders of any of the counties authorized by law to adopt a Stock Law prohibiting cattle Erom running at lazge or upon the written petition of 50 freeholders of an area within a county, if the Stock Law is in force in that area only, the commissioners court must order an election to determine whether the Stock Law will be repealed. It is required, however, that the petition be"signed by at least 24 freeholders from each Justice precinct in the county if the Stock Law is in force countywide. If the Stock Law is in Eorce in an entire county, it cannot be repealed by any area within the county except by a two-thirds majority of the votes cast by the freeholders of the county. (c) Domestic Turkeys T'he freeholders of any political subdivision of Bastrop, Blanco, Clay, Collin, DeWitt, Gonzales, Gillespie, Guadalupe, Parker or Wise counties may petition the commissioners court to conduct an election in the subdivision for the purpose of determining if domestic turkeys are to be permitted to run at large in the subdivision. A petition must be signed by at least 25 freeholders.~~ Sec. 5.023. Criminal Offenses far Violating Stock Laws {a) Local Option -Animals Other Than Cattle 1f a person knowingly turns out oc causes to be turned out on land that does not belong to him os that is not under his control, or knowingly fails or refuses to keep up any stock which is prohibited from running at large in any county or area of any county in which the Stock Law has been adopted, or knowingly allows any stock to trespass on the land of another, or knowingly permits his stock or stock over which he has control to run at large, when the stock is prohibited from running at large by a local Stock Law, he is guilty of a Class. C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500. This statute applies to hogs sheep goats horses~ules hacks iennets or donkeys. (b) Local Option -Cattle and Domestic Turkeys If a person knowingly permits any cattle or domestic turkey to run at large in any territory where a Stock Law is in force prohibiting any such animals from running at large, lie is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $5()D.zz6 "Run at large" means to stroll without restraint or'confinement or to wander, rove or ramble at will unrestrained. Therefore, it is hot a violation of this statute for a person to stake out an animal on public property or on another person's property without permission. The purpose of this statute is to protect the public at tazge from damage 28 i RPR.16 '97 9~41HM KERR CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.8 LIVESTOCK LAWS OF TEXAS done by livestock not under the control of its owner. Any method of control or restraint that prohibits the animal from wander, strolling or roving is sufficient ~i Art 5.03. Animals Running at Large on Highways Any person. owning ,or having responsibility for the control of any horse, mule, donkey, cow, bull, steer, hog, sheep or goat, who knowingly permits the animal to traverse (cross) or roam at large, unattended, on the right of-way of any U. S. highway or state highway, but not including numbered farm-to-mazket roads, is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500. Each day that an animal is permitted to roam at large is a sepazate offense. It is lawful, however, ro move livestock from one location to another by herding them on, along or across a highway, or ro lead or drive the stock on, along, or across a highway. State Highway Patrolmen, and county and local enforcement officers have the power and duty to enforce this statute, and they are authorized to enforce it without the use of a written warrant. This statute controls over any local option Stock Laws permitting livestock to run at large on public roads, and regardless of the results of any elections held in connection with any local option Stock Law.bO Art 5.04. Limited Free Range for Hogs The freeholders of a county or an azea that has adopted a Stock Law (see Sec. 5.021(x)) or the freeholders of an area that is between two areas of a county that have adopted a Stock Lay may petition the commissioners court to conduct an election for the purpose of determining whether hogs aze to be permitted to run at large in the county or area for a period beginning on November 15 of each year and ending cn February 15 of the following year.zi7 A petition for a countywide election must be signed by at least 50 freeholders. A petition for an election in an area of a county.must be signed by at least 20 freeholders. A petition for an election in an area that is between two azeas that have adopted a Stock Law and in which there are fewer than 50 freeholders must be signed by a majority of the freeholders in the area. An election under this statute may be combined with an election for a Sbck Law (see Sec. 5.02(x)). However, the propositions must be submitted and voted on as separate issues and the returns and proclamations of results must be sepazate for each propositionnz Art. 5.05. Trespass by Livestock Running at Large The provisions for the impoundment and sale of livestock running at lazge which trespasses on private property and causes damage aze found in the Estray Act. (See Chapter 1V, Estrays.) 29 _. ..... c~or~~ ,~ ~~ 83019s=aoo~ Flled~_~Y ~ ~ vy A.D.19~~ k Coun PATRICIAD ~~ ____~~ b .ZY~..~ ay ~J 1 ~ ~ ~I,A• 4~- l~RII, 5, 1997 WE, THE FOLLOWING LAND OWNERS AND TAX PAYERS LIVING IN HILL COUNTRY RANCH ESTATES NUMBER III, PETTTION FOR OUR RIGHTS AND RELIEF IN REMOVAL OF THE FREE ROAMING, PRIVATELY OWNED SHEEP AND GOATS THAT ARE DAMAGING OUR PROPERTIES. THESE ANIMALS HAVE BROKEN OFF WATER FAUC~S, EATEN OUR FLOWERS, SHRUBS, TREES, GRASS AND llEST'ROYEDt LANllSCAPIN(i. WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO RESOLVE THIS PROBLEM, REGARDLESS OF OUR EFFORTS TO COOPERATE WITH THI Y OFFICIALS, DURING THE PAST THREE MONTHS. FOR SOME OF T IIOPERTY OWNERS, THIS HAS BEEN RECURRING FOR THE PAST TWO TO THREE YEARS. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE KERR COUNTY.AUTHORTTI~. CONTACT THE OWNER OF THESE ANIMALS AND REQUIItE'TI3E '~" IlvIlvIEDIATE REMOVAL AND CONFINEMENT WITHIN PASTURESVO~R ~"~' STRUCTURES SUFFICIENT TO PREVENT THEIR CONT ESCAPE AND DESTRUCTION OF OUR PROPERTIES. WE PREFER TO RES THIS PROBLEM WITHOUT LITIGATION, BUT FULLY INTEND TO PRESS CHARGES AND ASK FOR DAMAGES, IF THESE ANIMALS CONTINUE TO DESTROY OUR PROPERTIES. r, ~ `- ~Yo - -~~AD.18,~ Y RIGA DYE q7 ~, urt, Ken unty, lams ~ 5~ Deputy PLEASE PROVIDE i~&~ELIEF FROM THIS SITUATION NOW! 7~ TJ7 i ~o~: ~~~ if J~2 PAGE 2 OF 2 PETITION FOR RELIEF FROM SHEEP AND GOATS DAMAGING PROPERTY ! ~` HPR.16 '97 9~36W'I KERR CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.1 r ~~• ' ? LivESrocx LAWS oFTEXAs CHAPTER IV.ESTRAYS Ark 4.01. EstrayAct The legal procedure of impounding and disposing of estrays is presQibed in Chapter 142 of the Texas Agriculture Code.~s+ The Estray Act was extensively rewritten by the Texas Legislature in 1986 and amended in 1993 to cover exotic livestock and exotic fowl. Ark 4.02 Meaning of Bstray An "estray" is a valuable domestic animal which has strayed from its owner.~~ An animal may be an "estray" even though its owner is remote or would not reclaim his wandering animal with reasonable diligencel~ or the animal is found a great distance from its accustomed range?~ As used in the Estray Act, "estray° means any stray horse, stailion, mare, gelding, filly, mlt, mule, hinny, jack, jennet, hog, sheep, goat, any species of cattle, exotic livestock or exotic fowl78B "Exotic Livestock" means grass- eating or plant-eating, single-hooved or cloven-hooved mammals that are not indigenous to this state and are known as ungulates, including animals from the swine, horse, tapir, rhinoceros, elephant, deer, and antelope families but not including a mammal defined by. Section 63.001, Parks and Wildlife Code, as a game animal, or by Section 71.001, Parks and Wildlife Code, as afur-bearing animal, or any other indigenous marttmal regulated by the Parks and Wildlife Department as an ..endangered or threatened species- The term does not include a nonindigenous mammal located on publicly owned land.1A9 Art. 4.03. Finding an F.stray; Notice A person who fords an estray on his own property, or the custodian of public property who finds an astray on public property, must report the presence of the astray to the sheriff of the county where the astray is discovered as soon as reasonably possible.19O If the sheriff or his designee determines that an astray located on public property is dangerous to the public, he may immediately impound the animal without notifying the owner."' If the owner does not immediately remove the astray, the sheriff must proceed with the impoundment process. (See Art. 4.07). ' Ark 4.04. Redemption ofFstrayFound on prfvateI'rojierty The owner of an estiay found on private property may redeem the animal from the owner or occupant of private property by paying a redemption fee, if applicable, and any damages incurred by the owner of the property?9z If the owner fails to redeem the astray within a reasonable period after notification, the sheriff, at the request of the .j ., HYK. lb 'y/ `.1~.jbW1 kf.}ZK l.V ''""LIVESTOCK LAWS OF TDCASa deg ~~~ r.e owner of the property where the estray is located, must immediately impound the animal. Art. 4.05. Redemption Fee and Damages The sheriff, or sheriffs designee, may require a collection fee in an amount set by the sheriff not to exceed $25 if the sheriff or hi, designee is present at.the time the owner claims the estray.'A' If the astray is found on private property, the owner of the property is entitled to receive hom the owner of the estny a reasonable amount for maintenance of the astray and any damages, so long as the notice of astray was given to the sheriff no later than the fifth day after the owner of the property discovered the astray. The owner of the property may accept an agreed amount from the owner of the astray or file a petition with the justice court to have the amount determined by the justice of the peace.l~ However, the property owner may not hold the livestock under any circumstances.lf the sheriff assessed a collection fee for an astray, the ownc~' of the astray may file a similar petition with the justice court if he disagrees with the amount of the fee?9s Art. 4.06. Justice Court Petitfon and Appeal A petition in justice court seeking a determination of the amount of a redemption payment or the amount of a collection fee must contain the following. (1) the name of the owner of the astray; (2) a description of the" astray; (3) the number of days the astray was trespassing; (4) the name of the owner of the property; (~ the purpose For which the land on which the trespass occurred is used; and (f,) a statement that the astray owner and the property owner are unable to agree on the amount of fl1e payment ~% Either the owner of the astray or the owner of the property may appeal the justice court's determination to a panel of three disinterested persons familiar with livestock who rz<;ide in the county. The panel is appointed by the justice of the peace,197 and the paneI's decision is final. Art 4.07. Impoundment of Fstray The sheriff or the sheriffs designee must impound an astray in tlu following situations: (1) the owner of the astray is unknown; (2) the sheriff or the sheriff's designee is unable to notify the owner; (3) the astray is dangerous to the public; (4) the astray is located on the public property and after notification is not immediately removed .by the owner; or (5) the astray is located on private property and is nat reiteemed within a reasonable time after notification.»' After impounding the astray, _ the sheriff must prepare a Notice of Estrav (See Appendix), and lilt suth notice in the astray records in the county clerk's office. Z~ RPR.16 '97 9~37Rt1 KERR CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.3 LlvesTOCx LAWS OF TExAS Art. 4.08. Owner of Estray Unknown If the owner of the estray is unknown, the sheriff or the sheriffs designee must make a diligent seazch for the identity of the owner of the astray, including a search in the county register of recorded brands, if the animal has a brand. If the owner is not identified the sheriff must advertise the impoundment of the astray in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least twice during the fifteen days after the date the animal was impounded. Notice of the impoundment must be posted on the public notice board' at the courthouse.l~ This can be accomplished by posting the Notice of Estray mentioned above (See Appendix) on the public bulletin board, along with the Notice of Impoundment (See Appendix). Though not specifically required by statute, the sheriff should also execute an Affidavit of Publication and Posting of Notice of Fstray (See Appendix) to verify that the publication and posting requirements have been met,. and place the affidavit in~the astray records of the county. Art. 4.04. Recovery of Impounded Estray by Owner The owner of an astray may recover possession of the astray at any time before the astray is soid 200 To recover possession the owner is required to execute an Affidavit of Ownership (See Appendix), which must be approved by the sheriff or his designee and filed in the astray rernrds of the county clerk The owner must also pay alI astray handling expenses before he can retake possession of the animal which may Include all expenses incurred by the county in impounding, handling, seeking the owner of, or selling the es(ray as determined by the county sheriff. If the owner of the astray disagrees with the amount set by the sheriff, he may petition the justice court and appeal in the manner described above. (See Art. 4.06). A person may claim to be the owner of exotic livestock or exotic fowl only if the animal is tagged, branded, or marked in another conspicuous~manner that can be read or identified from a long distance and that identifies the animal as the property of the claimant2m If all of the above steps have been taken, then the owner must execute an Affidavit of Receipt of Fstray (See Appendix) and deliver it tc the sheriff to be filed in the county clerks office.?OZ Only then wn the owner retake possession of the estmy. Art 4.10. Use of Estray _ The astray may not be used by the sheriff for any purpose during the period he1d.200 Likewise, an astray on private property may not be used by the owner of the property for any purpose.zna 24 FaPR.16 '97 9~38RhtF~J2R CO JP4 210 367 3005 --P.4-"-~ LIVESTOCK LAWS OF TFacAs Ark 4.11. Saie of Impounded Estray If the ownership of the essay is not determined before the third day after the date of final advertisement, or if the estray is not redeemed.before• the.l8th day after the date of impoundment; the county has title to the estray and the sheriff must sell the estray at either a sheriff s sale or public auction licensed by the US. Department of Agriculture.~0a The sheriff will allocate the proceeds of the sale in the following order of priority: (1) payment of the expenses of sale; (2) payment of the impoundment fee and other chazges due the sheriff; and (3) if applicable, payment of any amount for maintenance and damage due to the owners of the private property from which the estray was impounded. If there aze proceeds remaining after the sale and all expenses have been paid, the sheriff must pay the balance to the owner, if known. If the owner is still unknown, the balance must be deposited in the county jury fund, subject to the claim of the original owner of the estray.~ The owner may recover the net proceeds of the sale within one year of the sale by providing an Affidavit of Ownership which has been approved by the sheriff and filed in the estray records of the county clerk207 Any time the sheriff sells an estray the sheriff must execute a Report of Sale of Impounded Stock (See Appendix) and file the report in the county estray records of the county clerk. Ark 4.12 Escape or Death of Impounded Estray If the estray dies or escapes while impounded, the sheriff shall make a written report of death or escape and file the report-with the county clerk for placement in the county estray record? RPR.16 '97 9~39HM KERB CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.5 LIVESTOCK Lnws of Tlxns CHA.I''I ER V. LIVESTOCK RUNNING AT LARGE ArG 5.01. General Rule There is no general law which prohibits an owner of stock from permitting his stock to runat large.n0 Unless a Stock Law is in force, it is permissible for livestock to run at large.211 However, the owner of the stock may be held liable for damages caused by his trespassing stock as provided by the Fstray A~ 212 An exception to the general rule prohibits stock from running at lazge on highways. (See Art. 5.03). Arl: 5.02. Local Option Stock Laws Sec 5.021. Livestock Other Than Cattle (a) Petition and Election If 50 freeholders (resident owners of land) of any county or 20 freeholders of any azea with a county sign a petition stating the class or classes of animals which they desire shall not run at large in the manly or area, the commissioners court must order an election to be held in the county or azea for the purpose of permitting the freeholders to detertnine whether any horses, mules, jacks, jennets, donkeys, hogs, sheep or goats shall be permitted to run at lazge in the county or area within the county.n~ When there is territory between two areas of a county which have adopted a Stock Law, or when then: is temmtory adloming an area wTi1- adopted a Stock Law in a county or in an adjoining county, and in the territory there are less than 50 freeholders, an election must be ordered on a petition of a majority of the freeholders residing in the territory by the commissioners court of the county in which the territory lies. If there are Less than 20 freeholders in the intervening or adjoining territory, on a petition of a majority of the owners of the land, the commissioners mart must issue an order extending the Stock Law to the territory and the territory must be included in the territory of the adjoining area. Where there are no freeholders in the intervening or adjoining territory, on a petition of the owner or owners of the land, the commissioners court must issue and order extending the Stock Law to the territory, and the territory must be included in the territory of the adjoining azea. Any person or persons who own lands adjoining any other lands which have been added to territory in which a Stoc~lc'law is in force, have the same right and on a - petition of the owner or owners, the commissioners mart must issue an order extending the Stock Law to the territory and it must be included in the territory of the adjoining area.21 Upon the filing of a petition, the commissioners court, at its next regular term, must order an election to be held throughout the county or in the particular area of the county not less than 30 days from the date of the order.215 If a 26 ciu x, ~uri~ r.~, LIVESTOCK LawsoFTFxns . majority of the votes cast at the election is against letting the specified animals run at Iarge, the County Judge must immediately issue his proclamation declaring the result of the election and post the proclamation at the rnurthouse door. After the expiration of 30 days from the issuance of the proclamation, it is unlawful to permit any of the specified stock to run at large in the county or area within the county 216 (b) Lawful Fence Owners and lessees of land are required to fence against stock which is permitted to run at large. If a Stock Law has been adopted in the county or azea within a county, the owner or lessee must fence only against stock not covered by the Stock Law or stock permitted to run at large. Rny fence which is suffident to keep out ordinary stock permitted to run at large is a lawful fence. Three barbed wires with posts not more than 30 feet apart, and one or more stays between them, or pickets four feet high and not more than six inches apart constitute a lawful fence, provided the fence is at least four feet high The freeholders c+f any county or area within a county in which a Stock Law is in force may decide by a majority vote whether three barbed wires without a board shall constitute a lawful fence.n~ Sec. 5.022. Cattle (a) Petition and IIection If 35 freeholders (resident owners of land) of any county or 15 freeholders of any azea within a county sign a petition stating that they do not desire that cattle be permitted to run at large, the commissioners court must order an election to be held in the county or area within the county for the purpose of enabling the freeholders to determine whether cattle will be permitted to run at large.n8 Countywide elections are not permitted -only. elections in azeas within the county, in the following counties: Andrews, Coke, Culberson, Hardin, Hemphill, Hudspeth, Jasper, Jefferson, Kenedy, Kinney, LaSalle, Loving, Motley, Newton, Presidio, Roberts, Schleicher, Terry, Tyler, Upton, Wharton, and Yoakum.n9 When there is territory between two areas within a county which have adopted the Stock Law, and in the intervening territory there aze less than 50 freeholders, an election must be ordered on the petition of a majority of the freeholders residing in the intervening territory. When the petition is filed, the commissioners mart must order an election to be held not less than 30 days from the date of the order.~l If a majority of the votes cast is "for the stock law," the county judge must immediately issue his proclamation declaring the result and have the - proclamation posted at the courthouse door. After 30 days from the issuance of the proclamation, it is unlawful to permit cattle to run at larger ~~ RPR.16 '97 9~40HM 14=RR CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.7 L1V 6STOCIC LAWS OF TncAS (b) Election to Repeal Stock Law on Cattle Upon the written petition of 200 freeholders of any of the counties authorized by law to adopt a Stock Law prohibiting cattle from running at lazge or upon the written petition of 50 freeholders of an area within a rnunty, if the Stock Law is in force in that area only, the commissioners court must order an election to de~***+tnP whether the Stock Law will be repealed. It is required, however, that the petition be signed by at least 24 freeholders from each Justice precinct in the county if the Stock Law is in force countywide. If the Stock Law is in force in an entire county, it cannot be repealed by any area within the rnunty except by a two-thirds majority of the votes cast by the freeholders of the county. (c) Domestic Turkeys The freeholders of any political subdivision of Bastrop, Blanco, Ciay, Collin, DeWitt, Gonzales, Gillespie, Guadalupe, Pazker or Wise rnunties may petition the commissioners court to conduct an election in the subdivision for the purpose of determining if domestic turkeys are to be permitted to run at lazge in the subdivision A petition must be signed by at least 25 freeholders.~~ Sec. 5.023. Criminal Offenses for Violating Stock Laws (a) Local Option -Animals Other Than little If a person kroiwingly turns out or causes to be turned out on land that does not belong to him os that is not under his control, or knowingly fails or refuses to keep up any stock which is prohibited from running at large in any rntutty or area of any county in which the Stock Law has been adopted, or knowingly allows any stock to trespass on the Land of another, or knowingly permits his stock or stock over which he has control to run at large, when the stock is prohibited from running at large by a local Stock Law, he is guilty of a Class. C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500. This statute applies to hogs, sheep, boats, horses ales. Tacks, iennets or donk~= (b} Local Option -Cattle and Domestic Turkeys If a person knowingly permits any cattle or domestic turkey to run at large in any territory where a Stock Law is in force prohibiting any such animals from running at large, lie is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $500. - "Run at large" means to s(roil without restraint or'rnnfinement or to wander, rove or ramble at will unrestrained. Therefore, it is not a violation of this statute for a person to stake out an animal on public property or on another person's property without permission. The purpose of this statute is to protect the public at large from damage 78 i HPR.16 '9'7 9~41RM KERR CO JP4 210 367 3005 P.B LIVESTOCK Laws of TLxns done by livestock not under the control of its owner. Any method of control or restravnt that prohibits the animal from wander, strolling ~or roving is sufficient Art 5.03. Animals Running at Large on highways Any • person. owning ,or having responsibility for • the _ mntml of any horse, mule, donkey, cow, bull, steer, hog, sheep or goat, who knowingly permits the animal to traverse (cross) or roam at lazgc, unattended, on the right-of-way of any IJ. S. highway or state highway, but not including numbered farm-to-mazket roads, is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a foie not to exceed $500. Each day that an animal is permitted to roam at large is a sepazate offense. It is lawful, however, to move livestock from one location to another by herding them on, along or across a highway, or to lead or drive the stock on, along, or across a highway.' State Highway Patrolmen, and county and Local enforcement officers have the power and duty to enforce this statute, and they are authorized to enforce it without the use of a written warrant This statute controls over any local option Stock Laws permitting livestock to run at large on public roads, and regazdless of the results of any elections held in connection with any local option Stock Law.pO Ark 5.04. Limited FreeRange forhogs The freeholders of a county or an area that has adopted a Stock Law (seeSec. 5.021(a)) or the freeholders of an area that is between two areas of a county that have adopted a Stock Lary may petition the commissioners wort to conduct an election for the purpose of determining whether hogs are to be permitted to run at large in the county or area for a period beginning on November 15 of each year and ending cn February 15 of the following year.z+~ A petition for a countywide election must be signed by at least 50 freeholders. A petition for an election in an area of a county.must be signed by at least 20 freeholders. A petition for an election in an area that is between two azeas that have adopted a Stock Law and in which there are fewer than 50 freeholders must be signed by a majority of the freeholders in the area. An election under this statute may be combined with an election for a Stock Law (see Sec. 5.02(a)). However, the propositions m1:st be submitted and voted on as separate issues and the returns and proclamations of results must be separate for each pmposition~z Ark 5.05. Trespass by LmestackRuxxingatLarge The provisions for the impoundment and sale of livestock running at large which trespasses on private property and causes damage aze found in the Estray Act (See Chapter IV, Estrays.) 29 VERIFYING PETITIONS I. PETITIONS Chapter 277 of the Election Code applies to all election petitions filed under a law outside the Election Code except for a local option liquor election petition and candidates' petitions. A. Six Signature Requirements 1. Signer's signature (the only requirement that must be in the signer's handwriting); 2. Signer's printed name; 6. Date of signing. NOTE: If any one of these elements is absent, the signature is invalid. B. "Residence Address" I. Street address OR address at which mail is received if residence has no address; 2. City; 3. State (not required if territory is wholly contained within Texas); and 4. Zip code. NEW-omission ofap code now does: not invalidate signature:- C. "Qualified Voter" - Reference to "qualified voter" outside the Election Code means "registered voter" as to the eligibility to sign a petition. "Registered voter" is defined as a person registered to vote in Texas whose registration is effective. [Sec. 1.005(16)] D. Miscellaneous M-I 1. The signer's signature is the ONLY information that is required to appear on the petition in the signer's own handwriting. All other required information may be filled in by another person. 2. The use of ditto marks or abbreviations on a petition does not invalidate a signature if the required information is reasonably ascertainable. E. Withdrawal of Signature (Section 277.0022) 1. A signer may not withdraw the signature from a petition after the date the petition is filed. Before that date, a signer may withdraw the signature by filing an affidavit with the receiving authority requesting that the signature be withdrawn. 2. A withdrawal affidavit filed by mail is considered filed at the time of its receipt. If the affidavit is received after the petition is filed, the affidavit is of no effect. F. Supplementing a Petition (Section 277.0023) 1. Generally, a petition may not be supplemented, modified, or amended after the date it is filed. 2. If a petition is required to be filed by a specified deadline, the petitioner may file one supplementary petition BY THAT DEADLINE if (1) the original petition contains a number of signatures that EXCEEDS the required minimum number by 10% or more, AND (2) the original petition is received NOT LATER THAN THE 10TH DAY BEFORE the deadline. The receiving authority must notify the petitioner of the sufficiency of the original petition not later than the 5th regular business day after its receipt. II. EXCEPTION TO CHAPTER 277 Local Option Liquor Petitions [Secs. 251.10, 251.11, Alcoholic Beverage Code] A. Voter Registrar's Statutory Duty -~---~-i: -:--; Must check names and voting precincts to determine whether signers _~__ v. '-~ ~= ~ -,:are qualified voters at time petition was issued. ~r+r ~2::~ Must certify the number of valid signatures to the commissioners court. .., ,mot. _. M-2 4. A petition signature is invalid if the signer signed the petition earlier than the 180th day before the date the petition is filed. B. Petition Requirements 1. Signer must be a registered voter. 2. Signer's voter registration number must be correct. 3. Signer's signature, voter registration number, and residence address must be in signer's own handwriting. 4. Signer's name must be signed gaa~llx as it appears on the current voter registration list. 5. The petition must be filed within 30 days of issuance. - 6. The minimum number of signatures required is 35% of the registered voters of the city, justice precinct, or county, as applicable. NOTE: It has been the consistent interpretation of this of5ce that ezcept as otherwise provided by law, once a local option liquor petition is fded, no signatures may be added or withdrawn. Thus, when a petition is filed, it stands or falls on its own merits. III. OTHER PETITIONS There are many different types of petitions authorized by Texas law. These petitions may involve political subdivisions other than the county. The laws relating to these petitions generally require the governing body or its clerk, not the voter registrar, to verify the petitions. The entities-assigned by statute to verify these petitions will invariably require the assistance of the local voter registrar in determining whether the signatures on a petition are those of registered voters. The following are common ezamples of types of petitions: A. Miscellaneous Petitions Calling for Elections 1. Bingo petitions [the Bingo Enabling Act, Article 179d, Texas Civil Statutes] 2. Horse Racing petitions [the Texas Racing Act, Article 179e, Texas Civil Statutes] NOTE: Signature must be exactly the same as name on voter registration list. 3. Tax Rollback petitions [Secs. 26.07, 26.08, and 26.085, Property Tax Code] 4. Petition under Certificate of Obligation Act of 1971 petitions [Section 271.049, Texas Local Government Code] M-3 5. Petition to Incorporate as a Type B Municipality [Secs. 7.001-7.008, Local Government Code] 6. Petition to Abolish Municipality Ceasing to Have Residents [Secs. 62.201-62.204, Local Government Code] 7. Petition to Adopt City Manager Form of Government [Sec. 25.022, Local Government Code] 8. Petition to Abolish City Manager Form of Government [Section 25.071, Local Government Code] 9. Municipal Disincorporation petitions [Sec. 62.002, Local Government Code] 10. Rural Fire Prevention District petitions [Secs. 794.011-794.013, Health & Safety Code] 11. Petitions for Removal of Board Members of Certain Rapid Transit Authorities [Chs. 451 and 452, Texas Transportation Code] NOTE: These are the only types of petitions that must be signed in "ink or indelible pencil." [Secs. 451.604(c)(3), 452.652(c)(3), Texas Transportation Code] r B. Candidacy Petitions ~ ~, 1. Candidates' Petitions in Lieu of Filing Fee [Secs. 141.061-141.070, Election Code] NOTE: Requirements apply to write-in candidates for the November general election, as well as primary candidates. [Secs. 141.061-141.070, Election Code] 2. Independent Candidates [Secs. 142.004-142.009] outlineskou nty.9Tccsem9Tpetition.doe M-4 `.. 'I `~ a I S ~ F Y 1 1 P S • ~~ . Y yi .yy '` a 3.B,y w=.~; p,. r. ta}xt,£i. x ~ y,~ ° .d.4 s [Sections 143.006 to 143.020 reserved for expansion] SUBCHAPTER B. LOCAL OPTION TO PREVENT CERTAIN ANIMALS FROM RUNNING AT LARGE 143.021. Petition for Election. 143.022. Election Orders. 143.023. Election. 143.024. Effect of Election; Adoption of Subchapter. 143.025. Subsequent Elections to Adopt Subchapter. 143.026. Repeal. 143.027. Extension of Subchapter to Adjoining Area by Order. 143.028. Fences. 143.029. Trespassing Animals; Impoundment by Individual. 143.030. Fees and Damages. 143.031. Impounding of Animals by Sheriff or Constable. 143.032. Sale of Impounded Animal. 143.033. Injury to Trespassing Animal. 143.034. Penalty. [Sections 143.035 to 143.050 reserved for expansion] SUBCHAPTER C. LOCAL OPTION LIMITED FREE RANGE FOR HOGS 143.051. Petition for Election. 143.062. Election Orders. 143.063. Election. 143.064. Effect of Election. 143.055. Subsequent Elections to Adopt or Repeal Free Range. 143.056. Combined Elections. [Sections 143.057 to 143.070 reserved for expansion] i. ~ -y n. µ 1.. $. I.v ~ , IA I ~ !. \~~. CHAPTER 143. FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS SUBCHAPTER A. FENCING OF CULTIVATED LAND Section 143.001. Sufficient Fence Required. 143.002. Gate. 143.003. Trespass by Livestock on Fenced Property. 143.004. Impoundment of Trespassing Livestock. 143.005. Liability for Injury to Trespassing Livestock. 74 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS SUBCHAPTER D. LOCAL OPTION TO PREVENT CATTLE OR DOMESTIC TURKEYS FROM RUNNING AT LARGE Section 143.071. Petition for Election. 143.072. Exceptions; Countywide Elections. 143.073. Election. 143.074. Effect of Election; Adoption of Subchapter. 143.075. Subsequent Elections to Adopt Subchapter. 143.076. Repeal. 143.077. Fences. 143.078. Trespassing Animals; Impoundment by Individual. 143.079. Fees and Damages. 143.080. Impoundment of Animals by Sheriff or Constable. 143.081. Sale of Impounded Animal. 143.082. Penalty. [Sections 143.083 to 143.100 reserved for expansion] SUBCHAPTER E. ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE ON HIGHWAYS 143.101. Definition. 143.102. Running at Large on Highway Prohibited. 143.103. Immunity from Liability. 143.104. Herding of Livestock Along Highway. 143.105. Impounding of Livestock. 143.106. Enforcement. 143.107. Conflict with Other Law. 143.108. Penalty. [Sections 143.109 to 143.120 reserved for expansion] SUBCHAPTER F. REMOVAL OF ADJOINING FENCES 143.121. Prohibition. 143.122. Removal of Fence by Owner. 143.123. Requiring Removal of Fence by Another Person. [Sections 143.124 to 143.130 reserved for expansion] SUBCHAPTER G. USE OF GRAZING LAND UNDER COMMON FENCE 143.131. Definition. 143.132. Use of Grazing Land Under Common Fence. 143.133. Remedies. 143.134. Penalty. 75 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS § 143.021 SUBCHAPTER B. LOCAL OPTION TO PREVENT CERTAIN ANIMALS FROM RUNNING AT LARGE Cross References Hogs, limited free range, local option, see 6~ 143.051, 143.058. § 143.021. Petition for Election (a) In accordance with this section, the freeholders of a county or an area within a county may petition the commissions court to con- duct an election for the purpose of determining if horses, mules, jacks, jennets, donkeys, hogs, sheep, or goats are to be permitted to run at large in the county or area. (b) A petition for a countywide election must be signed by at least 50 freeholders. Except as otherwise provided by Subsection (c) of this section, a petition for an election in an area within a county must be signed by at least 20 freeholders. (c) A petition for an election in an area may be signed by a ma- jority of the freeholders in the area if the area has fewer than 50 freeholders and is between two areas of the county that have previ- ously adopted this subchapter or is adjacent to another area, in that county or another county, that has adopted this subchapter. If the petitioning area is adjacent to an area in another county, the free- holders shall petition the commissioners court of the county in which the petitioning area is located. (d) The petition must: (1) clearly state each class of animal that the petitioners seek to prohibit from running at large; and (2) describe the boundaries of the area in which the election is to be held, if the election is to be less than countywide. Revisoi s Note The revised law substitutes "area within a county" for "subdivi- sion" in order to avoid a construction that would require the elec- tion to be held in a previously existing political subdivision. Other than use of the word "subdivision," nothing in the source indicates that limitation, and courts have indicated a legislative intent that area simply be defined by the petition. See Attorney General Opinion No. 0-3630 (1941) and the cases cited in that opinion. Historical Note Prior Law: Const. art. 15, g 23. G.L. vol. 8, p. 986. Acts 1876, p. 150. Rev.Civ.St.1895, arts. 4978, 4980. S1 5 § 143.021 LIVESTOCK Note 1 Acts 1899, p. 80. Acts 1915, 34th Leg., p. 206. Acts 1907, p. 150. Acts 1945, 49th Leg., p. 530, Acts 1909, p. 169. Acts 1953, 63rd Leg., p. 789, Rev.Civ. St.1911, arts. 7209 to 7234. Vernon's AnaCiv.St, arts. Constltudonal provisions Article 16, § 23, provides: "The Legislature may pass laws far the regulation of live stock and the protection of stock raisers In the stock raising portion of the State, and exempt from the opera- tion oP aucn laws other portions, sections. or counties; and shall have Power to pass Title 6 ch. 318, § 1. ch. 318, § 1. 6930 to 6932. general and special laws Por [he inspection of cattle, stock and hides and far [he regu- lation o[ brands; provided, that any local law thus passed shall be submitted to the freeholders of the section to be affected thereby, and aDProved by them, betore it shall go into ePPecL" Library References ® Animals (}49. C.J.S. Animals § 138. tl., Notes of Decisions In general 2 Amendment o1 petition 7 Classes of animals 4 Description and bountlaries oT territory af- Tectetl 5 Filing petition 6 Necessity antl sufficiency of petition, gen- 4 orally 3 Presumptions antl burtlen of proof 4 ~', Valltl ity Election generally 8 Prior laws t 1. Validity of prior laws The statute authorizing stock law elec- tions was not unconstl[utional. Ex parts Cowden (1914) 74 Ci.R. 449, 168 S.W. 539. 2. In general Sayles C1v.St. art. 4692a, authorising elections in territory intervening between two subdivisions in which [he law was op- erative, did not apply tq an election in ter- ritory embracing a town in which the law had previously been adopted. Gilley v. Haddox (Cr.App.1891) 15 S. W. 714. Under Const. Art. 16, ¢ 23, relating to the regula[iona oP Ilve stock and authorla(ng elections, a town incorporated under the general incorporation law could be included In a distrlet far which a stock law election was had. Blahop v. State (1914) 74 Cr. R. 214, 167 S. W. 363. lender Conat. Art. 16, ¢ 23, and statutes passed thereunder, regulating hve stock and authariztng elections, one or more dis- Victs, where the stock law has been put in Force, can be combined with territory where no electlon has been held, and there- by embrace an entirely new and complete district. Id. Where Rev.Civ. St.1911, art. 7235 et seq. (see, now. ¢ 143.071 et seq.), relating to horses and cattle, had not been adopted In a county, a railroad operating an unfenced track therein, unless negligent, was not lia- ble, under Rev. CIv.SL1911, art. 6603 (see, now, Vernon's Ann.Civ.S[. art. 6402). for hogs killed or injured while running at large in violation of Rev.Civ.St.1911, art. 7209 et seq. (see, now, this subchapter) adopted in ouch county. Ft. Worth & R. G. RY. Co. v. Wilhite (C1v.ADP.1919) 210 S. W. 765. It is necessary to allege and prove each of steps required where special stock law is relied upon. Watkins v. V'sughn (C1v. App.1920) 216 S. W. 480. Railroad wsa liable for running over hog though hog was at large contrary to stock law. Texarkana & Ft. S. Ry. Co. v. Har- ris[ (CIv.App.1932) 52 S. W.2d 1117. Statutes should be liberally construed In favor oY legality of stock law districts, where law authorizing their farmatlon has been substantially complied with. Tubbs v. Sample (CIv.App.1933) 62 93V.2d 363. error dismissed. Vernon's Ann.Clv.St. arc. 6944 (repealed; see, now, § 143.026) was to be read In light oY Vernon's Ann Clv.St. art. 6930 (now, this section ). Guatine County v. Rayburn (Civ.App.1954) 264 S.\\'.2d 552. Where county did not have stock law it was permissible for livestock to run at large. Brlte v. Pfeil (CIv.App.t960) 334 S. W.2d 596. \\'here two Separete petitions request flu election to be called for purpose of prevent- ing dlfterent types of livestock from run- ning at large. commissioners court can or- der one election to determine whole matter, but those hoiding elecdona should exercise 82 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS § 143.021 Note 5 care to avoid errors or confusion 1n ballot- ing. Op.Atty.Cen.1945, 0-6704. 3. Necessity and suff iclency of petition generally The -etition Yor an election is fundamen- tal and essential to the jurisdiction of the court in ordering an election on the adap- tlon of the law prohibiting hogs, goats, and sheep Prom running at large within a coun- ty or subdivision. Coleman v. Halium I Com.App.1921) 233 S.tV. 296. Under Rev.Clv.St.1911, arts. 7209 and 7211 (non-, [his section), a petition, describing the subdivision [o be affected as, "All oP Live Oak Penninsula, being all that portion oP said county bounded on the east by Red Fish and Aransas Bays, on the north by Aransas and CODanO Bays, on the south by the northern line of San Patricio county," was sufficient Ince v. Barber (Civ.App. lszz) z41 s.w. laz. In action against Interurban railway for killing hog, statute prohibiting hogs from running at large was not shown in force at time and place of killing, where Detltton and order [or election were not shown to describe territorial limits embraced. Texas Electric Ry. v. Reese lCiv.App.1925) 271 9. R'. 130. Where a petitlon Por a stock law election combined different kinds of livestock, and an order for an electlon required a separate ballot for all [he different kinds of live- stock and a separate ballot for cattle, the petitlon, order for electlon. notice, and or- der declaring results, all complied with statutes governing elections prohibiting livestock from running at large within a county Lack v. Morris (Civ.App.1956) 287 S.W.2d 500, ref. n. r. e. x11 complieJ with statutes governing elec- tions prohibiting livestock from running a[ large w~lthin a county. Lock v. Morris (Civ.App.1956) 287 3.W.2d 500, ref. n. r. e. 5. Deaerlption antl boo ndarles of territory affected A desert pion of an election district to determine whether stock may be allowed to run a[ large waa not defective. Jones v. Carver (1902) 29 Civ.App. 268, 67 S.N. 780. A petition Por election in a suhdivision of a county, e. g., a justice precinct, must par- ticularly describe the snbdivision and des- ignate the boundaries thereof, and an elec- tion without such a petition Is a nullity. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. Tolbert (1907) 44 Civ.ApD. 8, 101 S. W. 1015. Legislature, by special charter granted City of Dallas, having given it right and authority to control, regulate, restrain, and prohibit running at large of stock within t[s bounds, ae well as control of streets and Dubllc grounds, county cannot Invade its territory in attempt to exercise authority by a local option electlon. Cow- and v. State 11918) 89 Cr. R. 298, 202 S.N. 961. i'nder Rev.Civ.St.1911. art. 7211 (now. this section), it waa imperet7ve thflt a peti- tion for a stack law electlon in a subdivi- sion of a county should particularly de- scribe such subdivision and designate the boundaries thereof, and a petition, describ- ing asubdivision as "beglnnIDg at a point on the west boundary line of Franklin county; the N. W. corner of general stock law district; thence east with the N. B. line general stock law to where same con- nects nitlt," etc., waa insufficient. Aisob- rook v. State (1920) 8fi Cr. R. 271, 216 6. W. 1G7. 4. Classes of animals Election for adoption of the stock law for subdivision of county was void, the statute requiring the petition for election to specify the classes of animals desired to be re- strained and the order for election to con- form to the petition, whereas the petition specified hogs, sheep "and" goats, and the order hogs, sheep, "or" goats. Halium v. Coleman (Civ.App.1919) 214 S.tN. 989. Where a petition for a stock law election combined different kinds o[ livestock, and an order for an election required a separate ballot for all the different kinds of live- stock named in Vernon's Ann. Civ.St. art. 693U (repealed; now, this section), and a separate ballot for cattle ae provided for in Vernon's Ann.Civ.5[. art. 6954 (repealed: see, now, g 143.071), the petition, order for election, notice, and order declaring results, Under Rev Civ.St.1911, arts. 7209 and 7211 f note, this section) a petition, describing the subdivision as. "All of Live Oak Penin- sula, being all that portion of said county bounded on the east by Red Fiah and Ar- ansas Bays, on the north by Aransas and Cops no Bays. nn the south by the northern line of San Patricio county," was sufPl- cient. toes v. Barber ~Civ.App.1922) 241 S.R". 182. Under Rev. Civ. St.1911. art. 7211 (now, this section), description of a aubdtvision of Aransas county as Live Oak peninsula, bounded on the east by Red Flah and Ar- ansas bays; on the north by Aransas and Copano bays; nn the west by Copano and Puerto bays. and nn the south by the line between the counties of San Patricio and Aransas, was aufPicient. Johnson v. State (1922) 92 Cr. R. 418, 244 S. W. 609. <', 83 . ~ .. a y'W4. v s § 143.021 rav Note 6 t 6. Filing Petition Where statute provides that a term of court shall begin on a certain day, it begins ,~" with such day, and not at the Dartcular hour at which the court is accustomed to meet, in determining the time at which ap- plication for election under stock law must be filed. Barlow v. Slate (1904) 97 Cr. R. 119. 80 S. W. 375. i 7. Amendment of petition t 9 Where a petition to the commissioners' i~' court for a stock law election waa permit- s ¢ ted to be amended so as to include three other sun~eys, and change the number of the district. the amendments did not render fi the petition a new one. so that the court , ~ ?:T could not act thereon at that term. Bishop ~ T.!F v. State (1914) 74 Cr. R. 214, 16T S. W. 363. ~ 8. Validity of election generally A stock law election was void where the petition for election failed to describe the f limits of the justice precinct for which I[ ~,.'~, ~ was to be held by metes and bounds. Mis- souri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Tolbert (1907) 100 T. 483, 101 S. W. 206. i The validity of a stock law election may ' be inquired into in an action against a rall- °' road for injuries to stock. Missouri, K. & ' t s* { ~ T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Talbert (1907) 44 r _.. ~,~ ~~ CiV.APp. 8, 101 S. W. 1014. ESTOCK Title 6 Under Rev.Civ.St.1895, art. 4980 (now, this section), astock-law election was in- valid where the petition, the order of com- misaloners' court, the notices of election, and the proclamation of the county judge ordering an election contained no particular description by metes and bounds of the subdivision in which the election was to be held. Ex pane Gulledge (1909) 57 Cr. R. 156, 122 S. W. 21. Where a petition and order for a local option election to put the stock law in force in the justice precinct excepted a portion thereof, the fact that one of the polling places selected was within the excepted territory did not invalidate the election. Ex parts Stein, 61 Cr.R. 320 (1911) 135 S. W. 136. 9. Precumptianc antl burden of proof It was necessary to allege and prove each of steps required by Rev.CiV. St.1911, art. 7209 et seq. (now, this subchapter), where special stock law to relied upon. Watkins v. Vaughn (Civ.App.1920) 216 S. W. 480. Party claiming protection of law prohib- iting hogs from running at large must al- lege and Drove legal adoption of law at time and place where hog was killed. Tex- as Electric Ry, v. Reese (CIv.App.1925) 271 S. W. 130. § 143.022. Election Orders (a) After receiving a petition under this subchapter, the commis- sioners court at its next regular term shall order that an election be held throughout the county or in the petitioning area, as determined by the petition. The order shall designate a date for the election that is not less than 30 days after the date of the order. (b) Immediately after passage of a commissioners court order for an election, the county judge shall issue an order for the election that specifies: (1) the petition and the action of the commissioners court; (2) each class of animal that is not to be permitted to run at large; (3) the territorial limits of the area to be affected; (4) the date of the election; and (5) the location of the polls. (c) The county judge shall give public notice of the election by publishing the order under Subsection (b) of this section in a news- paper published in the county. If no newspaper is published in the county, a copy of the order shall be posted at the courthouse door and 84 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE § 143.022 at a public place in each justice precinct for a countywide election or at three public places in the petitioning area for an election to be held in an area of the county. Notice must be given for at least 30 days before the date of the election. Historical Note Prior Law: Rev.Civ. St.1895, art. 9981. Acts 1876, p. 150. Rev.Civ.St.1911, arts. 7212 to 7214. G.L. vol. 8, p. 986. Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. arts. 6933. 6934. Cross References Application of this section, local options, preventing cattle or domestic turkeys from running nt large, see g 143.073(a). Library References Animals X60 (2). C.J.S. Animals 44 142 to 166. Notes of Decisions In general 1 Conetructlon of ortler entl proclamation, In General 4 Deelgnation o/ polling place In ortler 3 I nClualgn of city 6 Pu blicatlon of notice 8 auiflclency of order 7 Term of court 2 Variance fi t. In general Where a petltfan [or a stock law election combined different kinds of Ilveatock, and an order Yor an election required a separate ballot for all the different kinds of live- stock, and a aeDara[e ballot [or cattle, the Detltfon. Order for eleetlon, notice, and or- der declaring results, all compiled with ata[utea governing electfona prohibiting Ilveatock from running s[ large within a county. Lock v. Morrla (CIv.ADD.1966) 287 S.W.2d 500, reP. n. r. e. Where two aeDarate petltlone request an eleetlon to be called for Durpoee oY prevent- ' 1ng different types of livestock from run- ning at large, commleaioners court can or- tler one eleetlon to determine whole matter, but those holding electfona should exercise care to avoid errors or confusion in ballot- ing. Op,gtty.Gen.1946, 0-6704. An election under Vernon's Ann.Civ. St. art. 6947 et seq. (see, now, 4 149.061 et seq.) to determine whether [o allow hogs free eange in a Drecinet could be held lmmedL e[ely Following a countywide election under Vernon'e Ann.CIV.S[. art. 6930 et seq. (now, this subchapter) Drohibiting hogs, sheep and goats from running at large. OD• Atty.Gen.1948, No. V-680. 2. Term of court Rev.Ctv.St.1895, art. 4981 (now, this sec- tion) only authorized making [he order (or the eleetlon at the next regular term of the commissioners' court after the filing o[ the petition for the election. Robertson v. State (1902) 44 Cr. R. 270, 70 S. W. 642. The provision of Rev.Civ.St.1911, art. T212 (see, now, this section), requiring the commissioners' court at Its next regular Perm after the filing of a petition therefor to order an eleetlon, was Intended only to prevent the court from delaying the Calling of an election, and did no[ invalidate an or- der for such election made at the same term at which the petltlon was filed. Cole- man v. Hallum (COm.ApD•1921) 232 9.W. 298. Although commissioners' court met at 10 o'clock an morning of second Monday of October and that day was regular day for convening of regular term of court Yor month oY Octobeq term began at beginning o[ the day and petition for stock eleetlon tiled at any [tme during that day would be considered ae being filed at October term of court Worthy v. {Ing (CIv.ADP.1952) 246 9.W.2d 325. Action by commissioners' court in order- ing stock law election at same term during which petltlon therefor was filed, did not Invalidate order for such election. Id. 3. Deelgnation of polling place In ortler Where a petltlon and order for election to adopt the stock law wlthln s justice pre- clnc[ excepted that portion of the Drecinet within an Incorporated town, and electors hying wlthln that portion were net permit- ted to vote a[ the eleetlon, the fact that ss C r . , Yy k ~.: a 4 § 143.022 LIVESTOCK one of the polling places selected was the courthouse located wlthin the excepted por- tion. was not such an Irregularity as would invalidate [he election. Ex pane Stein (1911) 61 Cr.R. 320. 135 S. W. 136. 4. Consfruction o{ ortler and proclamation, in general The order of the commissioners' court for a stock law election, and the proclamation oP the county judge issued in conformity therewith, are [o be construed as a whole. Ex parts Cowden (1914) 74 Cr. R. 449. 168 S. W. 539. Where the order for an election on the adoption of the law preventing hogs, goats, "and" sheep Prom running aC large stated that the petition requested such election, and included a copy of the petition praying for such an election, the statement in the conclusion of the order [hat the election was to be held to determine whether hogs, goats. "or" sheep shall be permitted to run at large was manifestly contrary to the in- tent of the court to order the election asked for, so [hat the word "or" can be construed to mean "and," as is permissible to effectuate the intention of the parties. Coleman v. Hallum (COm.App.1921) 232 5. W. 296. 4. Inclusion a/ city Under a city charter, an election ordered by the commissioners' court to determine whether hogs, sheep, and goats should run at large wlthin the county would be void as to the city, and could not prevent a saloon from being open on the day i[ was held. Reuter v Stale (1902) 43 Cr. R. 572, 67 5.W. 505. Stock law election will no[ be held invalid because order of ¢lection included territory within corporate limits of city and two § 143.023. Election Title 6 [awns, conced(ng that election could not be enforced in incorporated territory. Goforth v. Corley (Civ.App.1918) 204 S. W. 243. 6. Variance Stock law election was invalid for vari- ance in deaeriptlon of precinct in petition and order for election. Ex parts Slmmone (1926) 102 Cr. R. 321. 277 S. W. 693. J. Sufficiency of ortler A variance in [he description oP territory contained in the published notice of elec- tion and the description in the order Par election waa a mere irregular(ty, and was insufficieh[ to invalidate the electlon held thereunder, Kirkland v. Guinn (1901) 26 CIV.App. 39, 62 S. W. 1101. An order for an election, made by the county Judge in obedience to a prior order of the commissioners' court, to determine whether hogs, sheep, "or" goats should be permitted to run at large, le void, because In the alternative. Reuter v. State (1902) 43 CnR. 572, 67 S. W. 505. An order on a petition for an election as m whether animals shall be permitted to inn aC large ih 8 given territory was not void. Houston & T. C. R. Co. v, Thompson (CIv.App.1906) 97 S. W. 106, Adoption of Hog Law was not shown where order did not include territory in- volved. Texas Rlec[ric Ry. v. Reece, (COm..1PP.1926) 280 9. W. 179. 8. Publication of notice Publication for an election to he called for purpose of preventing different types of livestock Prom running at large may be made in a weekly newspaper of county, provided publication is continued for re- quired length oP time. Op.Atty.Gen.1945, n-6704. (a) If the election is not countywide, the county judge at the time the election order is issued shall appoint election officers for the elec- tion. In order to serve as an election officer, a person must be a freeholder of the county and a qualified voter. The election officers may appoint their own clerks. (b) If the election is countywide, it shat] be held at the usual vot- ing places in the election precincts. If the election is not countywide, the county judge shall designate the particular places in the petition- ing area at which the polls are to be open. (c) In order to vote at an election, a person must be a freeholder and a qualified voter. 86 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS § 143.023 (d) Ballots for the election shall be printed to provide for voting for or against the proposition, "Letting run at large," with the blank space printed with the name of each animal designat- ed in the election order. (e} The election officers shall make returns to the county judge of all votes cast for each proposition not later than the 10th day after the day of the election, The commissioners court shall open, tabulate, and count the returns in the manner provided for general elections in this state. The county judge shall immediately issue a proclamation declaring the result and post the proclamation at the courthouse door. Revisor's Note (1) The provisions of V.A.C.S. Art. 6935 prescribing the form of the ballot propositions and the method of voting have been su- perceded by Arts. 6,06{8) and 6.06, Vernon's Texas Election Code. The election code provisions require a single ballot proposition and eliminate scratch method voting. The revised law conforms to the election code provisions. (2) The revised law substitutes "election officer" for "election manager" in order to conform to modern terminology. Historical Note Prior Law: Acts 1876, p. 160. Acts 1919, 96th Leg., 2nd C.S., p. 160. G.L. vol. 8, p. 988. Acts 1966, 54th Leg„ p. 865, ch. 238, ¢¢ I, Rev.Civ.St,1895, arts. 4987, 4989, 4990. 2. Rev.Clv.5t.1931, arts. 7218. 7220, 7221. Vernon'e Ann.Civ.St. arts. 6928. 6935 to Ac[e 1919, 36th Leg.,. D• 149. 8997. Cross References Application oP this section, local options, Limited free range for hogs, see ¢ 143.053(a). Preventing cattle or domestic turkeys from running at large, see $ 143.073(a). In general 1 Contest of election e Order 3 Proclamation 5 Returns 4 Voter 2 Notes of Decisions t. In general Stock law election was not void, because one set of election of[lcera conducted both electlona, and one form o[ ballot was used [or both elections, Scurlock v. Wingate (C1v.App.1928) 283 S. W. 307. Where a petition Yor a stock law election combined dltterent kinds of lfveatock, and an order for an election required a aeDarste ballot for all the different kinds of ]ive- etock nam¢d, and a separate ballot 4or cat- tle, the Detttlon, order for election, notice, and order declaring results. all complied with statutes governing electlona prohlbit- 7ng livestock from running at large within a county. Lock v. Morris (CiV.App•1966) 287 S.W.2d 600, ret. n. r. e. 2. Voters Where a law authorizing a county elec- tion to adopt a local live-stock lew does not Yorbld freeholder citizens of incorporated cities from voting, they are not diequall- fted. Roberson v. State (1901) 42 Cr.R, 696, 89 S. W. 894. 87 Y z' fi' § 143.023 LIVESTOCK Persons to whom land has been conveyed to enable them to vote at an election were ~ not freeholders and qualified voters. Jones t v. Carver (1902) 29 CiV.App. 268, 67 S. W. 780. @ualitfed voters of all tetritory to be af- fected by operation of local option stock law are entitled [o vote, and law cannot be ~ legally enforced against such voters, not given opDOrtunity to vote at election. Cowand v. State (1918) 83 Cr. R. 298, 202 S. W. 961. In a county-wdde stock-law election, resi- dent citizens o(a city within county were entitled to vote even though such city was incorporated and had already passed an or- dinance which prohibited livestock from running a[ ]arge within its corDOrate limits. Luck v. Morris (Civ.App.1958) 287 S.W.2d 600. ref. n. r. e. 3. Order An order oP the commisaloners' court, au- [horl2ing acounty election to adopt a local live-stock law, was not invalid for failure to Iimtt the right oP freeholders alone to vote to the county. Roberson v. State (1901) 42 Cr. R. 595, 63 S. W. 889. Where petition and order for election to determine whether stock law should be put In force within a ]uatlce Drecinct excepted that port[on included within an incorporat- ed town, and the majority of the voters outside [he town voted 1n the aP(irmative, the fact that an order subsequently entered putting the law in force declared that it was in force in the entire precinct did not render it invalid, In so far as i[ applied to the precinct outside the town. Ex parts Stein (1911) 61 Cr. R. 320. 135 S. W. 136. Under Rev.Civ.St.1911, art. 7215 (now, this section), order oY county judge far stock law electlon for a commissioner's precinct sufflcienUy designated places at which polls should be opened. Goforth v. Corley (CIv,App.1918) 204 S,W. 243. 4. Returns Under Rev.Civ.St.1911, art. 7220 (now, this section), which provided that returns should be opened, tabulated and counted by the county judge In the presence of the county clerk and at least one ]ustice of the peace of the county, or two respectable freeholders of the county, where such re- turns were opened, tabulated, and counted by the commiseionera' court, [he stock law was not legally in force. Guif, C. & S. F. RY. Co. V. Campbell (Civ.App.19U7) 105 S. W. 539. Under Rev.Civ.S[.1911, art. 227G (see. now, Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 2349), the Yact that the tabulated returns of a stock law election were recorded in a book in 88 Title 6 which the result of all elections were re- corded, and not in the minutes of the court, did not invalidate the election, since the minutes of the court need not nece~- sarily be kept in one book. Bishop v. 9[ate (1914) 74 Cr. R. 214, 187 S. W. 363. Though the clerk of the commissioners' court should fail to record the tabulated re- Curna of a stock law election In the proper book. it would not invalidate the whole election, where every other essential was camphed with, and there was no doubt that the election was carried. Id. Under Rev.Civ.St.1911, art. 7220 (now. this section), the commisaloners' court of the county was required to open stock law election returns, and count find tabulate the votes. 7ohnson v. State (1922) 92 Cr. R. 418. 244 S. W, 809. Hog Law was not effective where com- mfssionera' court counted election returns and not county ]udge as required by Rev. Civ. S[.1911, art. 7220 fnow, this section). Texas Islectric Ry. v. Reese (COm.ADD. 1928) 280 S. W. 179. That stock law election oP4lcera made re- turhs ae from certain voting precinct, In- stead of drainage diatrlet, for which elee- tion was had, did not detest election. Scurlock v. Wingate (Civ.App.1926) 283 S. tV. 307. 5. Proclamation Under SaYlea' CSvil Statutes 1897, art. 4989 lRev.Clv,St.1911, art. 7220, prior to amendment by Acta 2nd C.S.1919, p. 150, ch. 59 ), which provided that returns should be opened, tabulated and counted by the county judge 7n the presence of the county clerk and a[ leas[ one justice oY the Deace of the county, or two respectable freehold- ers of the county, the commissioners' court had no statutory authority to declare the result of the election; but this was the duty of the county judge, in the presence of the parties named. Unless the provi- sions of the statutes were complied with the electlon would be invalid. King v. State (Cr.App.1903) 74 S.W. 773. The county judge moat publish the result of an election held to determine whether snick should be permitted to run at large. Id. Publishing the result of an election is a prerequisite to the validity of the law, and it la necessary to allege that a legal peti- tion for the electlon was presented to the court, an order for the electlon and a dec- laration of the result by the county judge, and publication SO days prior t0 the prose- cution o4 the suit. Watkins v. Vaughn t Clv.App.192U) 216 S. W. 480. lYhere plaintiff in suit for damages done to h/s crops by defendants' hogs did not al- Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS § 143.024 lege or prove that his crops were protected by a good and lawful fence, he could not recover, where he tailed to allege and prove that the county judge published or poated notice of result of election, putting the spe- cial stock law into effect; it being neces- sary to allege and prove each of ateDS re- quired where special stock law was relied upon. Id. The proclamation o[ the county judge, declaring the result of an election adopting the law prohibiting hogs. goats, and sheep Prom running at large, raises the presump- tlon that everything necessary to a legal election had been done. so that evidence such Droclamation wasr issued is sufficient to show the validity ofthe election without evidence as to the manner of counting and tabulating the votes. Coleman v. Hallum (Com.ApD.1921) 232 SW. 296. Where proclamation by county judge de- claring stock law In effect was not signed by him, but over 30 days after returns o[ election were canvassed, county judge signed and poated another proclamation to same effect, there was substantial compli- once with Vernon's Ann.Civ. St. art. 6937 (repealed). worthy v. Efng (CIv.App.1952) 246 9. W.2d 325. 6. Contest of election County judge was the only necessary contestee in contest of election relating to hogs, sheep and goats running at large. Ferguson v. Commissioners Court of Sabine County ICIV.App.1950) 230 S.W.2d 303. Where contestants served on county judge a copy of their petition alleging that election to determine whether hogs, sheep, and goats should be permitted to run at large within a subdivision of the county, was void and braying that contestees be restrained from enforcing the stock law and that election be adjudged void, there wee sufficient notice of intent to contest and statement of grounds of contest as re- quired by Vernon's Ann.Civ. St. art. 3042 et seq. (repealed; see. now, V.A.T.S. Election Code, art. 9.03 et seq.) and it was immate- rial that petition was filed in district court before service thereof was made on county judge. Id. § 143.024. .Effect of Election; Adoption of Subchapter (a) If a majority of the votes in an election are cast against the proposition, this subchapter is adopted and, after the 30th day follow- ing the date on which the proclamation of results is issued, a person may not permit any animal of the class mentioned in the proclama- tion to run at large in the county or area in which the election was held. (b) Sections 143.028-143.034 of this code apply only in a coun- ty or area in which this subchapter has been adopted. Revisor's Note (1) The revised law adds the reference to adoption of this sub- chapter in order to clarify and be consistent with similar refer- ences in other sections of the source law. (2) Subsec. (b) of this section is added in order to avoid adding a similar provision limiting application in each of those sections. Historical Note Prior Law: Acte 1876, p. 150. Rev.Civ. St.1911, art. 7221. G.L. vol. 8. p. 986. Acts 1955, 54th Leg., p. 665, ch. 236. tl 2. Rev.Civ.St1895, art. 4990. Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 6937. Notes of Decisions In general 1 1. In general V alitl ity of election 2 Under the stock ]aw, the owner of ani- mals prohibited from running at large is 89 ., ; ,.. r _8 ,, § 143.024 LIVESTOCK conclusively negligent, If they so run. and ~ liable [or their trespass on premises suffi- ciently fenced to turn animals authorized [o so run. Frazer v. Bedford (CIv.App. ~~ 1902) 66 S. W. 573. Under Stock Law (Acts 1899, p. 221, ch. 128, § 13), the bare presence of stock at large on a railroad track was negligence on the Dart oP the owner. Red River, T. & S. Ry. Co. v. Dooley (1904) 36 Civ.App. 364, 80 S.\V. 566. "f ~i iA Mules which broke loose during the night after they had been tied up by the owner after ceasing work for the day and which escaped and went on a railroad right of way and were killed, were not running at large within the law prohlblting animals from running at large. International & (}. N. R. Co. v. Seldera (1908) 50 Civ.App. 568, 110 S. W. 997. Under Const. Art. 16, § 28, relating to the regulatlona o[ live stock and authorizing electlona, a town Incorporated under the general IncorDOra[lon law could be Included In a district for which a stock law election wsa had. Bishop v. Slate (1914) 74 Cr. R. 214, 167 S.R'. 363. Under Const. Art. 16, § 23, and statutes Daseed [hereunder, regulating live stack and authorizing elections, one or more dis- Title 6 Legislature, by special charter granted City of Dallas, having given 1[ right and authority to control, regulate, restrain, and prohibit running at large of stock within its bounds, as well as control o[ streets and public grounds, county cannot invade its territory in attempt to exercise authority by a local oyt[on election. Cowflnd v. State (1918) 83 Cr. R. 298, 202 S. W. 961. There is no general law prohibiting stock running at large. Carvel v. Kuael (Civ. ADD.1918) 205 S. W. 941. Railroad which negligently caused over- flow was liable for running over hog which had been released to prevent drowning, though hog waa at large contrary to stock law. Texarkana & Ft. 3. Ry. Co. v. Har- riet (CIv.ADD.1992) 52 S.W.2d 1117. Where county 1n which truck driver col- lided with cow on "Farm to Market" road had adopted stock law, cattle owner could be held liable [or In]urles and damage to truck resulting from the collision. Weddte v. Hudgins (Civ.ADD•1971) 470 S.\V.2d 216, reY. n. r. e. 2. Valid lLy o} election An election waa void where the petition was to determine whether "hogs, sheep. and goats," should be restrained, and the order of court read ''hogs, sheep, or goats." McElroy v. Slate (1898) 39 Cr. R. 529, 47 S. W. 359. The validity of a stock law election may be inquired into In an action against a rail- road for 1n]urlea to stock. Missouri K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Tolbert (1907) 44 C. A. 8. 101 S.R'. 1014. Where a petition and order for a local option election to put the stock law in force In the ]uetlce preclnet excepted a portion thereof, the Pac[ that one of the Dolling places selected wsa wlthtn the excepted territory did not invalidate the election. Ex Darts S[e1n, 61 Cr.R. 320 (1911) 196 B.W. 196. ,e tracts, where the stock law hoe been put in farce, can ba combined with territory j where no electlon hoe been held, and there- [ ; ?~ by embrace an entirely new and complete district. Id. ~ Where cattle eseaped from the owner's inclosure through no fault oP his, he wsa ~ not guilty of a violation of the stock law. R prohlblting the running at large of animals. Ft. Worth & D. C. Ry. Ca. v. Decatur Cot- ~ ~ tm~ Seed OII Co. (CIV.ADp.1915) 179 S. W. . 1104. 6 - In action for death aP horse by falling '!^'~- Into defendant's cfatern, ordinance Drohfb- 'Y, "., ~ lting the running at large Of live stock wee ,':gr' (f complete detenee, unless defendant was P . P• ~- guilty of gross negligence In Darmltting the y i;s„ cfatern to remain open. Woodruff v. De- °, ehazo (Civ.App.1916) 181 S. W. 250. § 143.025. Subsequent Elections to Adopt Subchapter (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b) of this section, if this subchapter is not adopted at an election, another election for that purpose may not be held in the county or area in which the election was held earlier than one year after the date of the election. (b) Defeat of adoption of this subchapter at a countywide election does not prevent another election for that purpose from being held 90 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS § 143.026 immediately thereafter for an area within the county. Defeat of adoption of this subchapter at an election held in an area within a county does not prevent a countywide election for that purpose from being held immediately thereafter. Historical Note Prior Law; Rev.Civ.St.1895, art. 4997. Acts 1876, p. 150. Rev Civ. St.1911, art. 7228. G.L. vol. 8, p. 986. Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 6941. § 143.026. Repeal (a) The freeholders of a county or an area in which this sub~hap- ter has been adopted may petition the commissioners court to conduct an election for repeal of that adoption. The petition milst be signed by a majority of the freeholders who are qualified voters in the coun- ty or area subject to this subchapter. (b) An election under this section shall be ordered and conducted, the returns shall be made, and the results shall be declared in the same manner provided by this subchapter for an election to adopt this subchapter. (c) An election under this section may not be held earlier than two years after the date of the last election under this subchapter in the applicable county or area. (d) If at an election under this section a majority of the votes are cast for allowing the named animals to run at large, after the expira- tion of 1g0 days after the date of the proclamation of results a person may permit an animal of the class mentioned in the proclamation to run at large in the county or area in which the election was held. If a majority of the votes are cast against letting the named animals run at large, the operation of this subchapter in the county or area is not affected. Revisor's Note (1) The revised law designates the purpose of an election under this section as repeal of adoption of the subchapter because that is the effect of this provision. In addition, that designation is con- sistent with the provisions of Sec. 143.075 of this code relating to local option repeal of the stock law relating to cattle. (2) The revised law conforms the propositions on the repeal bal- lot to the propositions at the original election. Prior to 1955, the propositions at either election were "For the stock law" and "Against the stock law." Acts 54th Legis., 1955, Ch. 236, changed the proposition for the original election, but failed to amend the reference to those propositions in V.A,C.S. Art. fi945. The revised sl .~ . '~ m LIVESTOCK Title 6 § 143.026 s'i law conforms the two because the source law requires that the elec- ,4z tions be conducted in the same manner and merely refers to the `~ "stock law" propositions in Art. 6945 rather than requiring them. ~*~~ (3) The revised law omits the reference to "hogs, sheep and ~ goats" in V.A.C. S. 6944 because this subchapter applies to other animals as well. See the revisor's note under Sec. 143.029 of this ' code. Histortcal Note ~ p. / PNOr Law: • Acte 1899, p. 81. - i > ~.`.'~ Rev.Civ. at.1911, arts. 7252, 7233. ' ~ ~+ • Vernon'e Ann.Clv.at, arts. 6944. 6945. a~.?~ 1. Construction antl application Result of county-wide electfon can be re- pealed only by another county-wide elec- tion, and eubdlvielon election purporting to repeal 1t ae to that eubdlvielon was void. Guatlne County v. Rayburn (CIv.A-P•1954) 264 a.W.2d 552. Vernon'e Ann.Civ.St. art. 9844 (repealed: now, this section), was to be read in light Notes of Decisions of Vernon'a Ann,Civ.at. art, 6930 (repealed; see, now, $ 148.021). Id. Where a stock law election had been fa- vorably voted In Orange County within leee than two years. a Drovoaed stock law elec- tlon for eubdlvielon of Orange Covnty could not lawfully be held. OD.At[y.Gen. 1941, No. 0.PBf2. § 143.027. Extension of Subchapter to Adjoining Area by Order A commissioners court by order shall extend application of this subchapter to territory that is between two areas of the county that have adopted this subchapter or is adjacent to an area, in that county or in another county, that has adopted this subchapter if (1) there are fewer than 20 freeholders in the territory and a majority of the owners of the ]and in the territory petition the court to extend application of this subchapter to that area; (2) there are no freeholders in the territory and the owners of the land petition the commissioners court to extend applica- tion of this subchapter to that territory; or (3) a person who owns land that is adjacent to land to which this subchapter has been extended petitions the court to extend application of this subchapter to that person's land. Revisor's Note The revised law does not resolve the inconsistency of Subdiv. (2) of the revised section, which applies only if there are ne freehold- ers but requires the "owners" to sign the petition, because the re- visor could find no court case or other basis for resolution of the conflict. As a general rule, an "owner" is a "freeholder". 92 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS § 143.028 Historical Note Prior Law: Acts 1899, p. 80. Acts 1915, 34th Leg., p• 206. Acts 1907, p. 160. Acts 1945, 49th Leg., D. 530, ch. 318, ¢ 1. Rev.Civ.St.1911, arts. 7210 to 7234. Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 6931. Notes of Decisions In general t Ortler 2 7, In general The fact that land to which the stock law was sought to be extended constituted a part of a subdivision which had within 12 months rejected the stock law does not prevent the annexation of the land to an adjoining subdivision, which had adopted the law, and authorize an extension there- of, as provided by Rev.Civ.St.189b, art. 5001c (see, now, 4 143.021 and this section). Stokes v. Win!ree (1900) 23 Civ.App. 690, 57 3. W. 918. The stock law can be extended to terrtto- ry adjoining a subdivision o[ a county which hoe adopted the stock law. where it is part of another subdivision of the county In which election hoe been held within a year and the stock ]aw defeated. Id. Any defined territory which adjoins stock law dlatrict may be added to dle[rlet on pe- tition of owners thereof, though not all in- dividual tracts making uD added territory adjoin stock law district. Tubbs v. Sample (CIv.App.1933) 82 S.W.2d 362, error dis- missed. Plaintiff suing to restrain Interference with hogs on range could not question va- lidity of proceedings by which lands lying between premises involved in plaintiff's suit and hog law district were included in hog law dlatrlet. Id. Properly authorized agent or attorney in fact may act for landowner in execution of petition requesting inclusion oY land in stock law diatrtct. Id. Territory lying between three stock law diatricffi and including thirty freeholders need not be treated ea unit in coming un- der stock law. but portion thereof could be added to stock law dlatrict on owners' peti- tion. Id. 2. Ortler Where conditions exist which entitled owner o[ land to have came Dlaced under stock law, the commissioners' court hoe no diecretian and can be compelled by manda- mus to grant the application and enter an order extending the stock law to the ad- joining territory. Stokes v. Winfree (1900) 23 CiV.App. 890, 67 S. W. 918. Order o[ commissioners' court adding territory to hog law district held not inval- id as to al] added territory because owner of portion therepP did not sign petition, where such owner's land was on edge of added area farthest removed from hog law dlatrict and remaining tracts formed well- de[ined area. Tubbs v. Sample (Civ.App. 1933) 62 S.W.2d 362, error dismissed. § 143.028. )H'P.IICC.4 (a) A person is not required to fence against animals that are not permitted to run at large. Except as otherwise provided by this sec- tion, afence is sufficient for purposes of this chapter if it is suffi- cient to keep out ordinary livestock permitted to run at large. (b) In order to be sufficient, a fence must be at least four feet high and comply with the following requirements: (1) a barbed wire fence must consist of three wires on posts no more than 30 feet apart, with one or more stays between ev- ery two posts; (2) a picket fence must consist of pickets that are not more than six inches apart; 93 ' sp yet, ,_4 . ~t ~` . `,.e .., • ,~ ) t. 0. ~ ° . ~ l~ `e,.Pr ~+ <»- § 143.028 LIVESTOCK Title 6 ~' (3) aboard fence must consist of three boards not less than ,~ five inches wide and one inch thick; and '~ { (4} a rail fence must consist of four rails. (c) The freeholders of the county or area may petition the com- missioners court for an election to determine whether three barbed b wires without a board are to constitute a sufficient fence in the cdun- ;' ~ ty or area. The election shall be conducted in the same manner and q is governed by the same provisions of this subchapter provided for elections on the adoption of this subchapter. Revisor's Note The revised law refers to a "sufficient" fence rather than a "lawful" fence in order to be consistent with Subchapter A of this chapter. See the revisor's note under Sec. 143.001 of this code and the case mentioned there. Historical Note prior Law: Rev,Civ.SA1895, art. 4998. Acts 1876, p, 150. Acts 1901, p. 290. Acts 1879, p, 68, § 6. Rev.Civ.St.1911, arts. 7227 [0 7231. O.L. vol. 8. DP~ 986, 1368. Vernon'a Ann.Civ.St. art. 8942. Cross References Application of section, see $ ]43.024(b). Library References Fences (aa 6. C.J.S. Fences § 5 et Seq. Notes of Decisions t. Construction and application The statute providing that, after the adoption of the stock law in any county, "no person within [he county" shall be re- quired t0 fence against stack not permitted to run at large, exempts a railway company from the obligation to fence its tracks in a county in which the stock law has been adopted; the word "person" in the statute including corporatfons. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Tolbert (OIY,ApD•1906) 9D S. W, 508. Enclosure was required to be suhetantial antl provide reasonable protection against cattle oP ordinary diapoeition in order to establish "exclusive possession" [or the purpose of acquiring title to land by ad- verse possession under 10-year statute oP limitations, but limitation claimant need not have maintained each a fence as was defined by Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. arts. 3947 and 6942 (repealed; see, now, §g 143.001. 143.002, and this section) relating to the Impounding of trespassing stock. Ogletree v. Evans (C1v.App.1952) 248 S.W.2d 804, ref. n. r, e. § 143.029. Trespassing Animals; Impoundment by Individual (a) If an animal not permitted to run at large enters the enclosed land or, without being herded with other animals, roams about the residence, lot, or cultivated land of another person without the per- son's consent, that person, whether owner, lessee, or other person in 94 t ` ~ § 143'.032 LIVESTOCK laws forbidding the running at large o[ stock, testimony relating to conversation with deputy constable who took up cattle concerning his Investigation ae to owner- ship o[ cattle and his Yamlliarity with cat- tle was admissible on question o[ hie good faith in ascertaining ownership and making affidavit that owner was mknawn. Baker v. 9lmmona (C1v.ApD•1989) 128 S.W.2d 540. The right of yeraone taking up stock run- ning at large to sell the stock, fn absence .p, •. . f Title 6 oY knowledge of owner's identity, may be exercised in no other way than that pre- scribed by law. Id. 3. Aflltlavit The failure to [11e with county clerk affi- davit upon which sale of stock running at large was based Invalidated the sale. Bak- er v. Simmons (CIv.App.1989) 128 S.W.2d 540. ?~• § 143.033. Injury to Trespassing Animal 4 ~ If a person whose fence is insufficient under this subchapter maims, wounds, or kills a head of cattle or a horse, mule, jack, or jen- net, or procures the maiming, wounding, or killing of one of those an- '~' imals, by any means, including a gun or a dog, the person is liable to ~: the owner of the animal for damages. This section does not autho- rize aperson to maim, wound, or kill any horse, mule, jack, jennet, or head of cattle of another person. Revisor's Note The source law for this section has the same legislative history described in the revisor's note under Sec. 143.029 of this code. It was added at the same session that the Revised Civil Statutes of 1879 made the law inapplicable to cattle, horses, mules, jacks, or jennets. The 1879 revision deleted this provision for injury to those animals, but the provision was reenacted in the amendment of that same session described in the earlier revisor's note. Again, the revisor could find no legal basis for resolving the problems cre- ated by this section within the context of a nonsubstantive revi- sion. Historical Note Prior Law: Rev.Civ.St.1696, art. 4999. Acts 1876, p. 160. Acts 1901, p. 290. Acts 1879, p. 66, § 6. Rev.Civ.St.1911, art. 7230. G.L. vol. 8, pp. 988, 1388. Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 6943. Cross References Application of section, see $ 143.024(b). Notes of Decisions Ne9liaenee t Prosecution 2 1. Ne41i9enoe One placing polsan on his premises is not liable (or the death of another's cattle tres- passing thereon unless he [s]led to exercise reasonable care; failure of a railroad to notify an owner o[ cattle that 1t was going to place poison on its right of way was no[ negligence, where cattle entered Decauee s third person opened a gate. Ft. Worth & R. G. Ry. Co. v. Brown (CIv.App.1916) 1T3 S. W. 943. In action for death o[ horse by falling Into defendant's cistern, ordinance prohiD- io4 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS § 143.034 icing the running at large oP live stock was 2. Prosecution complete defense, unless defendant was Prasecutlon for killing hogs on cultivated guilty of gross negligence in permitting the land cannot be maintained In county which cistern to remain open. Woodruff v. De- has adopted the stock law. McCampbell v. shazo (Civ.App.1916) 181 S. W. 250. State (Cr.APP•1898) 45 S. W. 711. § 143.034. Penalty (a) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly: (1) turns out or causes to be turned out on land that does not belong to or is not under the control of the person an animal that is prohibited from running at large under this subchapter; (2) fails or refuses to keep up an animal that is prohibited from running at large under this subchapter; (3) allows an animal to trespass on the land of another in an area or county in which the animal is prohibited from running at large under this subchapter; or (4) as owner, agent, or person iri control of the animal, per- mits an animal to run at large in an area or county in which the animal is prohibited from running at large under this subchap- ter. (b) An offense under this section is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $5 nor more than $50. Revisor's Note (1) The revised law substitutes "knowingly" for "wilfully" to conform to modern usage in the Penal Code. See Sec. 6.03, Penal Code. "Wilfully" in this article was construed to mean "knowing- ly" in Ez Parte Cowden, 168 S.W. 539 (Tex.Crim.App., 1914). (2) The revised law classifies this offense as a misdemeanor in conformity with Sec. 1.07(a) (21), Penal Code. Historical Note Prior Law: Acts 1897, D. 112. Vernon's Ann. P. C. (1925) art. 7369. Acts 1907, p. 124. $ 20a. Acts 1973, fi3rd Leg., p. 995, ch. 399. ¢ 6. Rev.Civ.SL1911, art. 1241. Vernon's Ann.Civ. St. art. 6946a. Cross References Application of section, see § 143.1Y14(b). Library References Animals @701. C.J.a. Animals ¢ 273. Notes of Decisions In general t Inatrucilons and epeelal issues 5 Evitlence 3 Presum piions antl burden of proof 4 Intllctment, information, or complaint 2 2 V T.C.A. Agricupure CoOe-6 105 e Vy ' z a. y ~. ~,._,u S Y ~J '4 tiG ~~ } +•~- . , ~ , S r ~~ F i~ f1 § 143.034 LIVESTOCK 1. In general The fact that a local law prokdb)ting the running at large of ]Iva stock contains a civil remedy does hot preclude a criminal prosecution for s violation. Roberson v. State (1901) 42 Cr. R. 595, 63 S. W. 884. Where people of precinct, under Acta 1903, ch. 71, voted to adopt Acts 1899, ch, 128, prohibiting running oP cattle at large, but prescribing no penalty, resident of pre- cinct could not be prosecuted under the pe- nal provisions of Acts 1907, ch, 57, p. 123, which were never adopted by them. Ex parts Ash (1925) 99 Cr.R. 272, 269 S. W. 435, Under Vernon's Ann. P.C. (1925) arts. 1369 and 1370 (now, this aectlan and $ 143.082) punishing one who knowingly or willfully permits stock to run at large, etc.. a neces- sary element oP the offenses was an inten- tion to do the act prohibited or ouch negli- gence as was tantamount to a willful act, Jackson v. Overby (Civ.App.1945) 135 S. W. 2d 766. 2. Indictment, Information, or complaint In a prosecution for violating the local stock law adopted by a county, it wee es- aenttal to allege and prove the Drecedent steps, required by law, by which the local law was adopted. Hul v. State (1910) 58 Cr. R. 79. 124 S. W. 940. Where the information, in a proaecutlon 4or violating the local stock law, alleged that a petition was presented, asking that the commissioners' court order an election to determine whether horses, cattle, etc.. be permitted to run at large in said county, and that at the next regular term, the court passed an order directing an electlon, and that the county judge issued an order for the election and caused public notice thereof to be given, and that the electlon was held and the law adopted, the informa- tion wfla de[ec[Ive, (or no[ directly alleging that the commleaionera' court made an or- der directing an electlon to be held to de- termine whether horses, cattle, etc., should be permitted to run at large in Che county. Ia. A complaint [or violating [he stock law alleging [he same to have been In force In the Justice precinct, when, in fact, It was not In force, except in the territory outelde fln InWrporated town in spch preClpCt, Wfla fatally defective. Ez parts Stein (1911) 61 Cr. R, 320. 135 S. W. 136. A compla[nt and Information are Inauffi- cient, rvhere they do not allege a legal peti- tion for an election by the commleaionera' court for the election, the order by the county lodge declaring [he result of the election as provided by law, and a practa- matlon by publication or otherwise for 30 Title 6 days of the result oY the electlon. Aisob- rook v. State (1920) 86 Cr.R, 271, 216 S. W. 167. Information charging that defendant caused cattle to go within Inclosed lands of T. without T.'s consent should have alleged want of consent of the other renters or possessors oI the land in the incloaure in- cluding the owner, he having rented !o T. and others for shares o4 the crops. Jones v. State !1920) 80 Cr. R. 968, 217 S.W. 945. In a proaecutlon for vlolatlon of stock law, a variance between the information and the order oP the commissioners' court on the petition for election as to the de- acriptlon of the district, the word "south- ern" soPearing in the order, but not 1n the information, was immaterial. Johnson v. State (1922) 82 Cr.R. 418, 244 S. W. 609. 3. Evidence On a trial for Dermltting stock to run at large, evidence that accuaed's mare had been in the inclosed lands of witneesea sev- eral times is admissible to show that ac- cused permitted the an(mel to run at large Yrom Ume to [Ime. Rlack v. State (3911) 62 Cr.R. 77. 136 S. W. 478. In action for damage to crops caused by detendanta' cattle, evidence that plaintiff had a good fence, that defendants tur- nished posts for repairing lt, and that de- fendants' Yoreman tried to keep Che cattle out of plaintiff's tleld, showed neither a vl- olatlon of the stock law nor a treapaea. Tackaon v. Overby (Civ.App.1916) 186 S,W. 2d 766. Convictlon o[ causing cattle to go within Inclosed lands without consent fa unsup- ported by evidence, defendant having au- thority from the owner of the land who rented to others for shares of the trope. Tones v. State (1920) 66 Cr.R. 468, 217 S.W. 945. In a proaecutlon for vlolatlon o[ stock law where the information alleged that the dletr[ct constated oP a portion of a county [he defendant could not be convicted on proof of an order of the commleaionera' court evidencing an electlon for the entire county. 7ohnson v. State (1922) 92 Cr. R. 418, 244 S. W. 609. 4. PresumptlOna antl burtlen of proof Ina proaecutlon fbr permitting stock to run at large in county In which the stock law had been adopted, failure to prove the adoption o[ fhe law within the LerrRory wherein the otfenae is charged to have been committed la total to conviction, Cline v. State (1921) 88 Cr.A. 487, 227 S. W, 686. 106 Ch. 143 FENCES; RANGE 5. Instructions and special issues Acts 1897, ch. 87, ¢ 1, and Ac[s 1907, ch. 57. § 20a, are identical on the subject of failure to keep stock from running 8t large after the adoption of the stock law, and one charged with so permitting the stock to run et large cannot complain of a charge given under the law of 1897, where the § 143.051 stock law was in force at the time of the offense. Black v. State (1911) 62 Cr. R. 77, 136 S. W. 478. In a prosecution for violating the stack IBW. it was proper Yor the court to permit [he jury to go back two years prior to the filing of the complaint. Flaher v. State (1913) 71 Cr. R. 564, 160 S. W. 683. Revisor's Note (End of Subchapter) This subchapter omits V.A.C.S. Art. 6946, which validated elec- tions prior to the date of enactment, because it is executed. [Sections 143.035 to 143.050 reserved for expansion] SUBCHAPTER C. LOCAL OPTION LIMITED FREE RANGE FOR HOGS § 143.051. Petition for Election (a) The freeholders of a county or an area that has adopted Sub- chapter B of this chapter 1 or the freeholders of an area that is be- tween two areas of a county that have adopted Subchapter B of this chapter may petition the commissioners court to conduct an election for the purpose of determining whether hogs are to be permitted to run at large in the county or area for a period beginning on Novem- ber 15 of each year and ending on February 15 of the following year. (b) A petition for a countywide election must be signed by at least 50 freeholders. A petition for an election in an area of a county that has adopted Subchapter B of this chapter must be signed by at least 20 freeholders. A petition for an election in an area that is between two areas that have adopted Subchapter B of this chapter and in which there are fewer than 50 freeholders must be signed by a ma- jority of the freeholders in the area. (c) If the election is to be less than countywide, the petition must describe the boundaries of the area in which the election is to be held in the same manner as the description provided for the election on adoption of Subchapter B of this chapter. r Section 149.021 et seq. Prior Law: Acts 1919, 36th Leg., p. 149. Vernon's Ann.Cly. St. art. 6947. Historical Note Library References s -s ;" ~. ~~~ : . ?'r . o"i) :.t t Animals x}50(2). C.J.S. Animals §¢ 142 to 156. • 107 § 142.014 ANIMAL PRODUCT Title f (2) the sheriff has approved the affidavit; (3) the approved affidavit has been filed in the astray records of the county clerk; and (4) the sheriff has signed a county voucher directing the payment. Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 51, fi 1, eff. Sept 1, 1987. CHAPTER 143. FENCES; RANGE RESTRICTIONS SUBCHAPTER A FENCING OF CULTIVATED LAND Section 143.003 to 193.006. Repealed. SUBCHAPTER B. LOCAL OPTION TO PREVENT CERTAIN ANIMALS FROM RUNNING AT LARGE 193.029 to 193.032. Repealed. 193.034. Penalty. Section SUBCHAPTER E. ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE ON HIGHWAYS 143.101. Definition. 193.1Ob. Repealed. 193.108. Penalty. SUBCHAPTER G. USE OF GRAZING LAND UNDER COMMON FENCE SUBCHAPTER D. LOCAL OPTION TO PRE- 143.131 to 193.134. Repealed. VENT CATTLE OR DOMESTIC TURKEYS FROM RUNNING AT LARGE 143.079 to 193.081. Repealed. 143.082. Penalty. WESTLAW Electronic Research See WESTLAW Electronic Research Guide fol- lowing }he Preface. SUBCHAPTER A. FENCING OF CULTIVATED LAND ¢§ 143.003 to 143.005. Repealed by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 51, $ 5, eff. Sept. 1987 Historical and Statutory Notes Secion 8(b) of the 1987 repealing act provides: covered by the law in effect when the violation "A person who violates any provision listed in occurred, and the former law is continued in effect Section 6 of this Act before the date of this Act is for Chia purpose:' SUBCHAPTER B. LOCAL OPTION TO PREVENT CERTAIN ANIMALS FROM RUNNING AT LARGE ~ 143.021. Petition for Election Notes of Decisions 2. In general Issue of material fact as to whether horse own- ers had statutory duty to Pence horse precluded summary judgment for owners in negligence action brought by motorist whose vehicle collided with horse; though accident took place on farm-to- market mad, there was evidence that local stock law was in effect. Hollingsworth v. King (App. 7 Dist 1891) 810 S.W2d 772, error denied 810 S.W.2d 340, rehearing of writ of error overruled. ~ 143.024. Effect of Election; Adoption of Subchapter Notes of Decisions 1. In general and k43.090 (repealed) were also applimble within Section 142003 was applicable within the corpo- said limits if this subchapter and $ 143.071 et seq. rate limits of the city of Houston, and fifi 193.031 54 ANIMAL PRODUCTS § 143.074 Title 6 Nos t had been voted into effect within the corporate litnifa of the city. OpAtty.Gen.1983, No. MW-b86. ~- ' §§ 143.029 to 143.032. Repealed by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 51, 4 5, eff. Sept. 1, 1987 Historical and Statutory Notes Section 6(b) of the 1987 repealing ad provides: covered by the taw in effect when the violation "A person who violates aTMy provision listed in occurred, and the former law is continued in effect Section 6 of this Act before the date of this Act is for this purpose." ~ 143.034. Penalty [See main volume jor (a)] (b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor. Amended by AMS 198'1, 70th Leg., ch. 61, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Historical and Statutory Notes - . 1987 Legislation The 198'1 amendment, in subaec. (b), substituted "Class C misdemeanor" for "misdemeanor punish- able by a fine of not less than $6 nor more than $60". Section 8(a) oP the 1987 amendatory act pro- video: °fhis AM takes effect September 1, 1987, and applies only to esirays that are disrnvered on or after tlmt date. An animal that is an. Betray and that is discovered before the effective date of this Act is covered by the law in effect when the eatt~y was disrnvered, and the former law is continued in effect for tlda purpose." Cross References Puniahmen6 Class C misdemeanor, see V.T.C.A., Penal Code $ 1223. SUBCHAPTER D. LOCAL OPTION TO PREVENT CATTLE OR DOMESTIC TURKEYS FROM RUNNING AT LARGE ,. ~ 143.073. Election Notes of Decisions 1. Ia Qeneral b77, 324 S.W2d b40, opinion withdrawn in part 326 Lock v. Morris (CivApp. 1956) 287 3.W2d 500, S.W2d 131. ref. n.r.e.. 9. Review 4. Notice o[ election Collins v. Jones (Civ.App. 1968) 320 S.W.2d 189, certified question answered (main volume} 169 Tex. Collins v. Jones (CivApp. 1968) 320 S.W.2d 189, 677, 329 S.W2d 640, opinion withdrawn in part 326 certified quea~ion answered [main volume} 159 Tex. S.W 2t1 181. - 4 143.074. Effect of Election; Adoption of Subchapter Notes of Decisions Construction and application 1 and 143.080 (repealed) were also applicable within said limits if § 143.021 et seq. and this subchapter bad been wted into effect within the corporate 1. Corrotruction and application limits of the city. OpAtty.Gen.1983, No. MW-586. Section 192.003 was applicable within the corpo- rate limits of the city of Houston, and §$ 193.031 66 $4148.075 to 143.081 Repealed ANIMAL PRODUCTS Title 6 44 143.078 to 143.081. Repealed by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 51, 4 5, eff. Sept. 1, 1987 Historical and Statutory Notes Section 6(b) of the 1987 mpeeling act provides: covered by the law in effect when the violation "A person who violates a,ry provision listed in occmzed, and the former law is continued in effect Section 6 of this Act before the date of tide Act ie for this purpose." $ 143.082. Penalty [See main volume jar (a)] (b) An offense under this section is a Clara C misdemeanor. Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg.. eh bl, 4 3, eff Sept. 1, 1987. Historical and Statutory Notes 1987 Legislation The 1887 amendment, in wbeec. (b), aubsdtuted "Glees C miademeanor•' for "misdemeanor punish- able by a flrn of rwt less than $b nor more than E29d'. Section 8(a) of the 1987 amendatory act pm video: "This Act takes effect September 1, 1987, and applies only to estrays that are disrnvered on o: after that date. An animal that is an eatray and that is discovered before the effective date of this AM is covered by the law in effect when the extra} was discovered, and the Cormer law is continued it effect for this purpose." . Crow References Punishment, Claw C misdemeanor, see V.T.CA., Penal Code $ 1228. SUBCHAPTER E. ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE ON HIGHWAYS $ 143.101. Definition In this subchapter, "highway" means a U.S. highway or a state highway in this state, bu does not include a numbered farm-to-market road. The terttt includes the portion o Recreation Road Number 266 that is located in Newton County between State Highwa; Number 57 and the boundary line with Jasper County. Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg.. cle. 380, 4 1, eff. Aug. 31, 1987. Historical and Statutory Notes 1887 Legislation The 1987 amendment added the sentence bring- ing aportion oY Recreation Road Number 266 within the definition oP "highway". 4 143.102. Running at Large on Highway Prohibited Notes of Decisions 1. ConetruMioa and application 3: Presumptions and burden o[ proof Ramey v. Richardson (CivApp. 1966) 397 Ramey v. Richardson (CivApp. 1965) SW2d 288, [main volume] ref. ns.e.. S.W2d 288, [main volume] ref. n.r.e.. 4 143.105. Repealed by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 51, 4 5, eff. Sept. 1, 1987 Historical and Statutory Notes Section 6(b) of the 1987 repealing act provides: "A person who violates any provision listed i Section b of this Act before the date of this Act b6 ANIMAL PRODUCTS ¢¢ 143.131 to 143.134 Title 6 ~ Repealed covered by the law in effect when the violation occurred, and the former Iaw ie continued in effect for this purpose." ~ ¢ 143.108. Penalty [See main volume for (a)J (b} An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor. (See main volume for lc)] ' Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 61, ¢ 4, eft. Sept. I, 1987. Historical and Statutory Notes 1987 Legislation The 1987 amendment, in subset. (b), aubstiWted "Glees C misdemeanor" for "misdemeanor punish- able by a 6ae of not less than $6 aor more than $200"• Section 6(a) of the 1887 amendatory act pro- vldes: "Phis Act takes effect September 1, 198?, and applies only to eatraye that are discovered on or after that date. An animal that ie an astray and that is discovered before the effective date of this Act s severed by the law in effect when the estray was discovered, and the former law is continued in effect for this purpose." Cross References Punishment, Class C misdemeanor, see V.T.CA, Penal Code fi 1223. SUBCHAPTER G. USE OF GRAZING LAND UNDER COMMON FENCE $¢ 143.131 to 143.134. Repeated by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 51, ¢ 5, eff. Sept. ~1, 1987 ' Historical and Statutory Notes Section 8(b) oY the 1987 repealing act provides: covered by the law in effect when the violation "A person who violates any provision listed in oawr~ed, and the former law is rontinued in effect Section 6 of this AM before the date of this Ad is tar this purpose." ~ .. ,. . Anwtationa Under Repealed Sections SECTION 143.133 Notes of Decisions 1. Injunction Minchen v. Ament (CivApp. 1966) 280 S.W2d SOG [main volume] ref. ns.e.. CHAPTER 144. MARKS AND BRANDS Administrative Code References Department oP Public Safety, crime records, reg- istration of tattoo marks for hogs, dogs, sheep, or goats, see 37 TAC 32751. WESTLAW Elechronic Research See WESTLAW Electronic IlESearch Guide fol- lowing the Preface. 57 COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST _PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND FIVE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. 7 MADE BY: l ~ OFFICE: i-'~' T- MEETING DATE: ~ P~~ Z Tn~tE PREFERRED: ~!' -,~~~'M. SUBJECT: (PLEASE BE SPECIFIC) ~/ - ~ 4 ,~ ~ u~~ ~- EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTE~(PLEASE STATE REASON) ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: IF PERSONNEL MATTER -NAME OF EMPLOYEE: NAME OF PERSON ADDRESSING THE COURT: i~i ~' --- Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title S, Chapter SS1 and SS2, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: 5:00 P.M. previous Monday. All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court Meetings. Your cooperation will be appreciated and contribute towazds you request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rules Adopted by Commissioners' Court. Item ~°~ l~' ~ l ~oR7~.~ ~tion tl ~pns ~a ~ on E~ 1°n fox t sY~eeP x to Pxeven wing at ~~ s~ N~ is fx~` gang 9O2`Hll~o ovnt~ t°sreyl III t ~x 10 ~ 199"1 Vol V page 4'75 t ,~