The following could provide possible support and justifications for a finding that the interests of Williamson County was at stake in the removal suit as opposed to only Dan A. Gattis’ personal interest being at stake in the removal suit:
(1) If Williamson County Judge Dan A. Gattis were removed, it would disrupt the business of Williamson County since a new judge would have had to be appointed and there would be a period of time before he or she could serve as an effective county judge for Williamson County;
(2) The fact that the failure of Williamson County to provide representation would deter persons from seeking office if they think that they will have to spend their own funds to fight charges arising from their performance of their official duties. To the extent that the charges are without foundation or are political or vindictive in nature, this reason assumes greater significance.
(3) Officials should not have to assume the personal burden of defending against frivolous suits brought against them due to their official duties. Because the court declined even to issue citation and because the statute exempted actions taken before the current term of office from being grounds for removal, the court could reasonably determine that this suit was frivolous.
The findings that are necessary to allow reimbursement by Williamson County to Dan A. Gattis are based on Attorney General Opinion JC-0294 (2000). Said Opinion is attached to this item for your review.
|