Could a Texas county bail-bond board cap the total bail bonds written by a state-authorized corporate surety?

Texas AG Opinion JM-799: County Limits on Corporate Bail-Bond Sureties

Plain-English summary

Cameron County asked whether its bail-bond board could limit the total value of bonds written by a corporate surety that held state authority to do surety business and otherwise qualified for a county license.

The Attorney General concluded that the board could not impose the proposed limit. Former article 2372p-3, section 6(g), capped an ordinary bondsman's aggregate outstanding bonds at ten times the value of deposited security. Section 7(a) expressly said that this cap did not apply to a corporate surety.

Section 7(b) also made the State Board of Insurance certificate conclusive evidence of the corporation's security, solvency, and credit. A qualifying corporate surety therefore was not subject to a separate county-created aggregate bond limit based on the personal-bondsman security formula.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1987. 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

What limit applied to ordinary bondsmen under the quoted statute?

Section 6(g) prohibited aggregate bail bonds exceeding ten times the value of the property held as security on deposit or in trust.

Did that ten-times-security rule apply to corporations?

No. Section 7(a) expressly stated that section 6(g) did not apply to a corporate surety.

What did the state insurance certificate prove?

Under section 7(b), the certificate was conclusive evidence of the corporation's security, solvency, and credit.

Could the county board adopt a different aggregate cap anyway?

JM-799 said no when the corporation held the required state certificate and met the applicable section 6 requirements.

Did the opinion exempt corporate sureties from every licensing requirement?

No. The opinion's factual premise was that the corporation had met all legal requirements for a license, and section 7(a) still required the applicable section 6 requirements other than subsection (g).

Background and statutory framework

The Cameron County Bail Bond Board regulated county bail-bond licenses under former article 2372p-3. A corporation certified by the State Board of Insurance applied for a license and had met the stated legal qualifications.

Section 6(g) established the security-based cap for bondsmen and required county officials to track potential liability. Section 7 created the corporate-surety rule and expressly removed subsection 6(g) from its application.

The opinion resolved the question by applying that express exemption and the conclusive-evidence provision for the state insurance certificate.

Citations

Statutes:

• Former V.T.C.S. article 2372p-3, sections 6(g), 7(a), and 7(b)
• Former Insurance Code article 8.20

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/jim-mattox/jm-799
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1987/jm0799.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Obvious character-level OCR errors have been corrected, but minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

September 28, 1987

Honorable Benjamin Euresti, Jr.
Cameron County Attorney
Courthouse - 974 E. Harrison Street
Brownsville, Texas 78520

Opinion No. JM-799

Re: Whether the Cameron County Bail Bond Board is authorized to set a limit on the value amount of bonds which a corporate surety may provide

Dear Mr. Euresti:

You ask:

Does the Cameron County Bail Bond Board have the authority to set a limit on the value amount of bonds that the corporate surety can make?

You provide the following factual background:

The Cameron County Bail Bond Board pursuant to Vernon's Civil Statutes Art. 2372p-3 oversees the licensing and regulating of bail bondsmen in said county. Under Section 7(a) a corporation certified to do business by the State Board of Insurance has applied for a license. Said corporation has met all necessary legal requirements to qualify for a license.

Section 6(g), article 2372p-3, V.T.C.S., provides:

No bondsman may execute, in any county, bail bonds that in the aggregate exceed 10 times the value of the property held as security on deposit or in trust under Subsection (f) of this section. A county officer or employee designated by the board shall maintain a current total of the bondsman's potential liability on bonds in force, and no further bonds may be written by or accepted from the bondsman when the limit is reached. When a bondsman's total liability on judgments nisi reaches two times the same amount as he has on deposit as security, no further bonds may be written until the bondsman posts additional security as required in this subsection. A bondsman whose license is effective may, at any time, by posting additional security, increase the bondsman's limit.

Section 7, article 2372p-3 states:

(a) Wherever in this Act any person is required or authorized to give or execute any bail bond, such bail bond may be given or executed by such principal and any corporation authorized by law to act as surety. When any such corporation authorized by law to act as a surety undertakes to be a surety on a bail bond, such corporation, before being acceptable as a surety on a bail bond, shall be required to meet the applicable requirements prescribed by Section 6 of this Act before being acceptable as a personal surety on a bail bond; Subsection (g) of Section 6 does not apply to a corporate surety.

(b) The certificate of authority to do business in this state issued to a corporation by the State Board of Insurance pursuant to Article 8.20, Insurance Code, as amended, shall be conclusive evidence as to the sufficiency of the security, the corporation's solvency, or its credits. (Emphasis added.)

Section 7(a), article 2372p-3, expressly provides that subsection (g) of section 6 does not apply to a corporate surety. Section 7(b) further provides that the certificate of authority issued to a corporation by the State Board of Insurance is conclusive evidence as to the sufficiency of the security, the corporation's solvency, or its credits.

Accordingly, the Cameron County Bail Bond Board is not authorized to set a limit on the value amount of bonds which a corporate surety may provide where the corporation has been issued a certificate of authority to do business in this state by the State Board of Insurance pursuant to article 8.20, Insurance Code and has met the requirements of section 6, article 2372p-3, V.T.C.S.

SUMMARY

The Cameron County Bail Bond Board is not authorized to set a limit on the value amount of bonds which a corporate surety may provide where the corporation has been issued a certificate of authority to do business in this state by the State Board of Insurance pursuant to article 8.20, Insurance Code and has met the requirements of section 6, article

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY
Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Tom G. Davis
Assistant Attorney General