Harris County Bail Bond Board v. Carol Burns

Opinion ON MOTION FOR REHEARING On motion for rehearing, appellee takes us to task for our finding the trial court erred in
renewing her bailbondsman license. We issue this opinion only insofar as to clarify our reading of the statute. Accordingly,
we begin with appellee's assertion in her motion that our prior opinion misconstrued the Bail Bond Act (Act). Appellee finds error in our decision because we found a basis for refusing to renew appellee's license in the section concerning
only suspensions and revocations of such licenses. Appellee's assertion brings to light a significant weakness in the Act
regarding the lack of guidance or meaning for the term "a legal reason" which the Act states may justify denying the renewal
of a license. Section 8 states the conditions under which a license may be renewed as consisting of the following: submitting
an application form that conforms to the requirements of the Act, accompanied by the fee of $500; no suspension or revocation
of the current license; and no legal reason why the application should not be renewed (emphasis added). Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat.
Ann. art. 2372p-3, 8(a) (Vernon Supp. 1994). Nowhere in this section concerning the renewal of a license does there appear
a list of reasons that could be considered "a legal reason" why the application should not be renewed. Appellee asserts without
any support for her contention that section 3 comprises the legal reasons which may justify a Board's failure to renew a license.
Section 3 sets out the eligibility for a license and does not state or even imply that its provisions are the legal reasons
referred to later in the Act in section 8.