What court fees can a Texas district clerk charge in child-custody and support cases, and can they charge when the attorney general represents a parent?

Texas AG Opinion JM-396: District Clerk Child-Support Fees

Plain-English summary

The Harris County Attorney, acting for the county's district clerk, asked the Attorney General to clear up three fee questions in family cases, called suits affecting the parent-child relationship. The tangle started because the 1985 Legislature had passed two different amendments to the Family Code and told each one to be codified in the same spot, section 14.13. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

The AG said both amendments were valid. One, from House Bill 1593, said no additional filing fee could be charged when a party files a motion to modify a decree or a motion to enforce an order. The other, from Senate Bill 1175, barred any clerk, auditor, sheriff, or other officer from charging a fee for services in a case where the attorney general is representing a party to obtain child support. Because the two dealt with different subjects and did not actually conflict, the AG treated the duplicate section number as a harmless clerical error and gave effect to both. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

On the second question, about fees for enforcement (including contempt) and modification suits, the House Bill 1593 provision controlled: the clerk could not charge a fee to file a motion to modify a decree or a motion to enforce an order. The phrase "no additional filing fee" referred back to the initial filing fee in the case, so the cost of these later motions was already covered by that first fee. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

The third question was whether a clerk could charge a parent a $5 fee for each income-withholding order mailed to an employer when the attorney general represented that parent. Ordinarily a clerk may charge up to $5 for mailing such an order. But the Senate Bill 1175 exemption applied, so when the attorney general is representing the managing conservator to obtain child support, the clerk cannot charge that parent the $5 fee. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1985. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Two 1985 laws both became Family Code section 14.13. Are both good law?

Yes. The AG concluded both amendments were valid. Because they covered different subjects and did not conflict, the shared section number was just a clerical mistake, and the AG harmonized them rather than picking one. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

Can a district clerk charge a fee to file a motion to modify or enforce a custody or support order?

No. Under the House Bill 1593 provision, no additional filing fee could be charged for a motion to modify a decree or a motion to enforce an order in one of these suits. The AG read "additional" as pointing to the initial filing fee, which already covered those motions. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

Could the clerk still collect a deposit for costs?

Yes. The House Bill 1593 language said it did not stop the clerk from collecting a deposit, set by the clerk as in other cases, for expected costs and other expenses in the proceeding. That is separate from charging a filing fee for the motion. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

When the attorney general represents a parent, can the clerk charge the $5 income-withholding fee?

No. Although a clerk may generally charge up to $5 to mail an income-withholding order to an employer, the exemption for cases where the attorney general is representing a party to obtain child support applied, so the clerk could not charge that fee. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

Background and statutory framework

Two 1985 enactments drove the analysis. House Bill 1593 (Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 239, at 2039-40) added the "additional filing fee not required" rule tied to motions to modify under Family Code §14.08 and motions to enforce under §14.09 or §14.091. Senate Bill 1175 (Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961) added the attorney general fee exemption. Both were directed to be codified as Family Code section 14.13. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

The AG resolved the duplicate labeling with settled construction rules: amendments passed in the same session are to be harmonized if possible (V.T.C.S. art. 5429b-2, §3.05(b)), and clerical mistakes by the Legislature should be disregarded. Because the two provisions addressed different topics, both survived. For the income-withholding fee, the general authority to charge up to $5 came from Family Code §14.43(1) (Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1972), but it yielded to the attorney general exemption in section 14.13 whenever the attorney general represented the parent seeking support. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

Citations and references

• section 14.13 of the Family Code
• Family Code §14.08, §14.09, §14.091
• Family Code §14.43(1)
• Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 239, at 2039-40 (House Bill No. 1593)
• Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961 (Senate Bill No. 1175)
• Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1972
• V.T.C.S. art. 5429b-2, §3.05(b)

Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/jim-mattox/jm-0396
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1985/jm0396.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF via OCR. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

The Attorney General of Texas

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General

December 19, 1985

Honorable Mike Driscoll
Harris County Attorney
1001 Preston, Suite 634
Houston, Texas 77002

Opinion No. JM-396

Re: Fees a district clerk may charge in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship

Dear Mr. Driscoll:

At the request of the district clerk of Harris County, you ask the following questions regarding fees to be collected in suits affecting the parent-child relationship:

1. Is section 14.13 of the Family Code, as enacted by House Bill No. 1593 or as enacted by Senate Bill No. 1175, valid and effective, or are both valid and effective?

2. What fee may the district clerk charge for contempt actions for enforcement of child support orders and suits to modify child support?

3. May the district clerk charge a managing conservator (represented by the attorney general) a $5 fee for orders withholding from earnings for child support?

Your first question arises because the Sixty-ninth Legislature enacted two amendments to the Family Code and provided that each of them would be codified as Family Code §14.13. Both provisions deal with fees in suits affecting the parent-child relationship. The first of those provisions was part of House Bill No. 1593:

Sec. 14.13. ADDITIONAL FILING FEE NOT REQUIRED. No additional filing fee may be collected or required in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship when a party to the suit files a motion to modify a decree under Section 14.08 of this code, or when a motion for the enforcement of an order is filed under Section 14.09 or 14.091 of this code. This section does not prohibit the clerk from collecting a deposit in the amount set by the clerk as in other cases for payment of expected costs and other expenses arising in the proceeding.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 239, at 2039-40. Senate Bill No. 1175 contained the other provision to be labeled Family Code section 14.13:

Section 14.12. EXEMPTION FROM COURT FEES: ATTORNEY GENERAL. A clerk, auditor, sheriff, or other government officer or employee may not charge a fee or other amount for services rendered in connection with an action or proceeding in which the attorney general of this state is representing a party for the purpose of obtaining child support.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961.

Amendments enacted in the same session of the legislature are to be harmonized, if possible. V.T.C.S. art. 5429b-2, §3.05(b). Also, clerical mistakes by the legislature should be disregarded. Attorney General Opinions M-1207 (1972); C-106 (1963); V-1234 (1951). The two amendments at issue deal with different topics and do not conflict. The overlap in labeling is nothing more than a clerical error. Thus, both amendments are valid.

The version of section 14.13 that is set out in House Bill No. 1593 provides the answer to your second question. That provision makes clear that the district clerk may not charge a fee for a motion to modify a decree or a motion for enforcement of an order in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Apparently the district clerk's question arose because of uncertainty about the interpretation of the phrase "no additional filing fee" in that provision. We think that the word "additional" is a reference to the initial filing fee in the suit affecting the parent-child relationship. In effect, the provision means that the cost of filing motions to modify or motions to enforce orders is covered by the initial filing fee.

Your third question is whether a clerk can charge a managing conservator who is represented by the attorney general a $5 fee for orders that are mailed to employers requiring them to withhold child support payments from an employee's earnings. Generally, a district clerk may charge such a fee:

The employer may deduct from the ordered amount an administrative fee of not more than $5 per month to be credited towards the obligor's payment of support. The clerk of the court may charge the requestor a reasonable fee for each order delivered to an employer by mail, not to exceed $5. (Emphasis added).

Family Code §14.43(1); Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1972. As we discussed previously, however, a clerk may not charge a fee for services rendered in connection with a proceeding in which the attorney general is representing a party for the purpose of obtaining child support. Family Code §14.13; Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961. That exemption is applicable in the situation you describe. Therefore, you may not charge the $5 fee when the managing conservator is represented by the attorney general.

SUMMARY

Section 14.13 of the Family Code, as enacted by House Bill No. 1593, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 239, at 2039-40, and section 14.13 of the Family Code, as enacted by Senate Bill No. 1175, Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 232, at 1961, are both valid. The district clerk may not charge a fee for motions to modify a decree or motions for enforcement of orders in suits affecting the parent-child relationship. When a managing conservator is represented by the attorney general, the district clerk may not charge the managing conservator a fee for orders mailed to employers requiring them to withhold child support payments from an employee's earnings.

Very truly yours,

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

JACK HIGHTOWER
First Assistant Attorney General

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

ROBERT GRAY
Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Sarah Woelk
Assistant Attorney General