If a Judge was supposed to be getting a salary supplement from County collected funds since 1996 and he did not find out about this supplement until 2003, did the four year statute of limitations start to run in 1996 with Strict Liabilty or from 2003 with Discovery .

Recognizing that you're talking about a judge, it still seems that the question of limitations presupposes the ability to bring a claim for backpay. A claim for backpay, however, is a claim for damages for which a waiver of governmental immunity must exist constitutionally or statutorily before jurisdiction to hear the claim will exist. Ware v. Miller, 82 S.W.3d 795, 804 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 2002, pet. denied); see also Bell v. City of Grand Prairie, No. 05-03-01749-CV (Tex. App.--Dallas Apr. 20, 2005, no pet. h.);City of San Benito v. Ebarb, 88 S.W.3d 711, 722-23 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 2002, pet. denied). The Ware decision indicates that no such waiver exists as to county officials seeking an award of back pay.

who needs law books or westlaw when you got the Brumley on your computer

Okay Scott, test time.
similar situation where hospital employees(county hospital) are complaining because they were not included in the county retirement system in the 80' and 90's and now want the Comm. Ct. to come up with the county's share of the $ that should have been credited to the system and ask TDCRS to credit them with that time. Stautes provide a permissive ability to do it, but can the employee force the issue? Has the SOL run or does the lack of Govt. waiver argument apply as well? We are assuming they would have been entitled to be enrolled in the system at the time.
Thanks for being such a great resource!

Some courts back in the late '80s and early '90s saw statutory entitlement as an employee's hall pass into the public treasury. Modern cases, such as those cited above, however, that have dealt with compensation entitlements under civil service statutes have been fairly consistent in holding that a claim for back pay under those statutes is a claim for damages for which immunity must be waived. I haven't looked at the statute at issue in your case, so I'm flying a bit blind, but here's my rough analysis anyway. In light of section 311.034, Government Code, a statute which simply provides that an employee may or must be compensated in a certain manner does not, in itself, waive immunity from suit. Unless your statute contains one of the classic jurisdictional immunity waivers (e.g., "sovereign immunity is waived and abolished ..." or "may sue and be sued"), governmental immunity from such back pay claims appears to subsist. The employees could file a mandamus action to compel compliance with the statutory scheme in the future, but their back pay claims would appear to be barred, unless the statute contains its own immunity waiver.

Don't have the cite in front of me but I believe it simply allows the TDCRS system a mechanism to fund or credit backtime upon the settlement of a suit or judgment of a court etc. or perhaps upon an order by the Comm Ct. that an error was made in the calulations etc. that needs to be remedied. I did not find a waiver of immunity. Addtitionally, I have letters from several of the employees refering to reguests made to prior hospital administrators dating back many years evidencing the employees knowledge of the situation way back. If we get there, does the staute of limitations bar those claims? I would think it would. Lastly, can a Comm. Ct. legally pay a claim that no longer has any legal merit(i.e. barred by SOL)?

The claims are barred jurisdictionally by governmental immunity and procedurally by limitations. See Tex. Const. art. III, � 52(a); see also State v. City of Austin, 160 Tex. 348, 331 S.W.3d 737, 742 (1960).